Every doctor, regardless of his practice, must in the end admit that something within the body heals it. The surgeon may remove a diseased organ or part but the healing of that surgery and the restoration of normal or near normal function if it can occur will be done by the law of life in the body. The physician who administers an antibiotic must acknowledge that even if the drug stops or hinders the proliferation of a deadly microorganism it is the recuperative abilities of the individual’s body that restores normal function when and if it occurs. Whether a drug is designed to increase function decrease function the ultimate success of that endeavor is the ability of the body’s inborn wisdom to respond in a positive manner to that procedure.
In the famous words of Dr. Ben Casey( from the 60’s TV drama of the same name)..” We’ve done all we can, he’s in Gods hands now!”….lol.
To which the chiropractor replies, “Whose hands was he in before?” 🙂
I guess the difference between Dr. Casey and objective chiropractors is that Dr. Casey places the patient in God’s hands after he has done all he can do with his educated, finite mind. The objective chiropractor places the person in God’s hands(under the principle, the law of life that He created) from the beginning of care. That’s why Dr. Casey gets the big bucks and I’m thankful that I am a chiropractor.
Interesting that in this post, we have moved from the chiropractic objective and it’s 33 principles (the title and initial statement that Joe made) to what precedes the Major Premise, which would be a theological construct and outside the realm of chiropractic philosophy.
Today, in 2015, does fully owning the concept of the major premise, by we human beings, implicate the need to expand ones experience into the theological?
Tongue and cheek, lol’s, and humor might be a disguise for other human agendas.
Nice thing is, Chiropractors do not have to end up leaving it in any hands, becauase it was never in their hands to leave.
I wonder how you think the biological principle of “hormesis” ties in with OSC?…
Kirk, isn’t hormesis the basis for Samuel Hahneman’s homeopathy? And isn’t that an approach to treating disease?
Kirk,
Exactly like every other princile. It is the full expression of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body that will manifest normal (pri27) motion (pri15) of the living body. Therefore a small amount of toxin, as an external universal force, can be adapted by the innate intelligence of the body as principle 23 mentioned within the limitation of e/matter (pri24). If you practice the chiropractic objective, the innate intelligence of the body of your practice members will ALWAYS adapt universal forces and e/matter so that all parts of the body will have coordination of action for mutual benefit (pri23). That includes the biological principle of “hormesis” which is outside the practice of the chiropractic objective.
May I conclude that with usage of a drug (medication), a chemical sought to stimulate or inhibit a physiological function, (eg. synthroid, corticosone, statins, ace inhibitors, beta blockers, ca channel blockers, ed drugs, pain drugs, proton pump inhibitor drugs, insulin, etc. etc.), that their forces, acting as first, universal forces are adapted by innate intelligence, p23, to render them innate forces, successfully, from 0%-100%, will determine their overall physiological effect, including deleterious effects on the organism.
Drugs effect body function. This is a fact. Adaptation and usage by ii determines their overal immediate and longtem benefit and or harm to living tissues.
I can understand how assimilation of nutrients is guided by p18, but I don’t always understand how direct chemistries, that duplicate or interact with body chemistries, taken into the body, relates to a particular chiropractic principle (of the 33).
Perhaps it is of the same type question I have referred to before, that being where mechanical meets vitalistic, material meets immaterial, physical meets metaphysical.
As man accumulates more and more knowledge, thru induction and empiricism, the submission to a higher intelligence, universal and innate, that give purpose, direction, and intent to life, to perspective, call into question where truth lies, particularly within a Non-therapeutic, non result based objective based profession.
As man has aquired more control over intelligent forms, called living things, this calls into question what the purpose of having this ability to control, truly is for,mor allowed to do.
David, the first ASSumption you make is that the drug has accomplished a positive/good/innate desired result. Not necessarily true. it only has accomplished a medical/chemical/OI objective which we have no idea as to whether it is benefiting the person unless you conclude that every person is better off with their symptoms treated/relieved. The second assumption you make is that the body is better off with that drug. We do not make that assumption, the md and only the md does. The third assumption is that the ii of the body changes that chemical (matter) into an innate force. The principle that is addressed by the drug is P. No. 17 , Cause and effect. Matter in the form of chemicals affects matter (in the form of Cells,Tissues, and Organs), that is the medical objective whether it is to save a life (or prolong a death), relieve a symptom, or cause death by lethal injection. You have just successfully defended/rationalized the practice of the medical objective by a chiropractor. It is sometimes called naturopathy, homeopathy or progressive chiropractic. We simply call it mixing. (providing you have not killed the patient, in which case it is called malpractice.) In what you have just described where does intelligence, force and their effect upon the matter, the chiropractic objective, enter into the activity by enabling the better expression of the forces to take place?
Joe,
Point 1. Agreed. Actually listening to those 87 reggie philosophy tapes, which I am doing, well, it’s interesting. I had listened to those tapes quite some time ago (when tape players came standard only in cars). That’s a laugh right? Had to find a frighten tape player. HaHa.
Point 2. Similar really to point 1. Yes, I see the md’ism there. Interesting that my educated intelligence is SO oriented to that Authority. And as you quite poignantly point out later, MIXER MIXER. Makes me want to scream. I acknowledge.
Point 3. You probably understand my question better than I do. Here comes the BUT.
In RWS, in Strauss, in BJ! On the blog, we always talk about ii Running the body.
Chemistry runs the body??? Internal chemistry, from the life matter, I took as innate matter and possessing innate forces. We take a drug. An OI universal matter chemical. It enters the body. It changes the body. Sometimes very predictably (short term at least). WHATS RUNNING THE BODY? II? The innate matter chemistry? The OI,pill absorbed into the bodies chemistries? WHAT?
Do you see my question? That’s why I keep coming back to let’s say P23
Where really, II ADAPTS UF, UM, into IF, IM. .???
And again in many ways, I think at least, I am close, very close, but yes sometimes as you have seen, perhaps still far away, at least in world view,mor point of view. And again, sorry for perhaps any purging I might have been accused of. I am certainly sincere, and trying very very hard to do my Homework, diligently.
This is just me. 🙂
One more point to Reggie, which I forgot to mention in my point1 reference. Listening to Reggie NOW, it’s totally different with my fuller understanding of OC and broader knowledge of the lexicon.
Reggie is a diamond. The guy was quintessential on point, communicative and congruent. Valuable for me to listen to.
I’m always so focused on making chiropractic fit a medical model.
To your question:In what you have just described where does intelligence, force and their effect upon the matter, the chiropractic objective, enter into the activity by enabling the better expression of the forces to take place?
You’re focusing on where the medical model supplies answers to this Chiropractic Philo AUTHORITY question. Interesting!
Answer: all the drugs, OI chemistries ONLY have bearing on the matter.
They serve only to increase LOM or to decrees LOM always to the limits of Educated intelligence.
Expression of Intelligence and force is strictly a chiropractic objective, except for perhaps a medical OI reduction in a LOM allowing a fuller expression of force. Yes/no
Let me simplify my question (try to be more on point)(boy- communicating thru these blogging vehicles can be tiresomely ineffective, but we do our best, aye?)
With regard to what was said ‘Whether a drug is designed to increase function decrease function the ultimate success of that endeavor is the ability of the body’s inborn wisdom to respond in a positive manner to that procedure.’,
May I conclude that
Again, vitalism dictates that the body is being Run by ii, adapting physical forces.
Mechanism dictates that the body is being Run by physical forces, only.
What do we actually mean by the words RUN (by)?