If as Gallup polls assert, 82% of Americans profess to believe in the foundational principle of our chiropractic philosophy, how did such a small minority manage to gain control of areas such as science and education? Further, this minority is allowed to convey, largely unchallenged, the idea that belief in an ADIO viewpoint represents a kind of mystical irrationality.
Dr. Joe do you think it’s a problem that we have this wonderful philosophy yet the only practice from it is the checking of the nerve system for the presence or absence of subluxation?
We have not applied the abstracts of our philosophy to any other aspects of life… other then the practice of chiropractic.
The outside – in thinkers have. As you said they run education, science…
Good observation Dr. Kresmir. We must distinguish the ADIO philosophy from the chiropractic objective (and the philosophy surrounding it). BJ seemed to portray them as synonomous. I think (NTOSC) is a part of an ADIO world and life viewpoint, but that viewpoint encompases so many other aspects of life beside the LACVS.
Hey Joe,
Which principle is that? Which Chiropractic principle did Gallop reference?
I would like to know that too.
I mean, which principle are you referring to Joseph?
Steve,
Our foundational principle is our Major Premise. There are two ways in which you can come to a belief/acceptance of our MP. The first is by induction, which is the means that we use in chiropractic. We look at the parts, from the planets to the atom and eveything in between, and we draw the conclusion of organization which bespeaks intelligence. That is rationalism. The second way is by deduction, which is the means used in religion. In that method, belief in deity, deduces there is organization and intelligence. There is no other conclusion you can draw. Either way comes to the same conclusion. I don’t know how those polled by Gallup came to their conclusion. I suspect it was probably by the second method. Since chiropractic is not a religion and since it uses rationalism, the first way seems to fit better into our philosophy, although I must admit that I personaly came to the conclusion of the existance of a MP by the second (only because I was a deist before I ever learned about chiropractic). Either way, induction or deduction, you can come to the same conclusion and that conclusion is the basis (foundation) for our chiropractic philosophy.
Hey Joe,
I think you are confusing the issue. When you say “82% of Americans profess to believe in the foundational principle of our chiropractic philosophy”, what you mean is 82% believe in god, therefore should see things as we do. A knowledge of god does not automatically include an understanding of chiropractic, nor does a knowledge of chiropractic include an understanding of all that is god. As you have said adjustments do not bring man in closer communion to/with god. If I am not mistaken you stated that was done through Jesus. Even an atheist can recognize the order of the universe and apply it to a working paradigm.
I think the problem lies in , as you say “the conclusion”. In a previous post you stated our philosophy does not necessarily start with god nor does it end(you said start again, but I like end better) with disease. Much of the confusion I have had on this blog is the jumping to conclusions. Belief and acceptance are not the same thing. I accept the major premise as is, not every god fearing soul does. I accept gravity, I don’t believe it is god sucking me to the ground. Gravity is a universal law, I accept that. You are free to attribute that law to a law giver if that is your personal conclusion.
Americans don’t understand chiropractic, that’s the problem. We just need to figure out if it is their problem or ours.
Another thing that strikes me funny is that everything you said about Americans is also very true within our own profession.
Steve, if you believe in God then you should automatically believe in the Major Premise. To not deduce that is irrational. True, some of those 82% may not accept that there is a principle of order in the universe in spite of their belief in God but they are probably institutionalized and really should not be considered in the discussion. There are probably just as many, who while a theists, do accept the principle of organization. I think the point I was making was that in spite of people saying they accept the reasonableness of our MP by virtue of a belief in God, they have allowed the minority to control the discussion. An “understanding of chiropractic” was not even at issue in my original post, just an acceptance of the MP. I think the original post was clear for what it was intended to say and you are confusing the issue. Are you assuming the role of resident “Devil’s Advocate” for the blog?:)
Sorry Joe,
I am no ones advocate, that would require too much forethought. I just get confused by your constant cross referencing god and chiro. My point was few if any of the 82% have ever heard of the MP. You said those polled believe in the MP, and I think that is misleading.
Your statement “if you believe in God then you should automatically believe in the Major Premise” only works one way. As you have said a nonbeliever can also understand the MP.
With all due respect I would like to add something here. There is obviously a chiro/religio conflict going on with you and Eric and probably me as well. Maybe we should start a separate blog to iron out those issues. It seems no one else cares because the thread always dies after we get to discussing this matter. Personally I’m here for the chiropractic not the arguments. I love learning and discussing the philosophy. The new vs the old interpretation of innate fascinates me, as I have said before I am in transition from BJ to present day.
And yes it is true the vocal minority are quite often in charge, because they are vocal. Who pushed for equal rights, the minority. Who has removed prayer from school, the minority. Who is trying to remove subluxation from the profession, the VOCAL minority. Who monopolizes this blog with religious discussion, the minority.
Steve, I’m the one who owes you the apology. I have no intention of making this a theology blog. However, sometimes in an effort to be open and fair I have let the discussion get out of hand. I assure you, I will do better. I still stand by my statements. If you accept God (by faith) then you accept the MP (by deduction) whether you recognize it as such or use another term is not of consequence. You are correct that it only works one way although some by calling the MP God try to make the MP a theological construct. That is the issue I have been having since 1969.
I don’t believe the chiro/religio conflicts can be ironed out and as of today, I have determined to end them. Actually, your interest in “the new vs old interpretation of innate” was what kept the discussion going (that and the hundreds who viewed the discussion but did not contribute). Thank you for your interest in learning and contributing. Perhaps one day we can be part of the vocal minority that changes this profession.
The situation involves The Alternate Golden Rule. You know this! Whoever has the gold makes the rules.
Those at the top of the world hierarchy have been consolidating power and increasing control. Our ADIO philosophy and any other that does not line up with their strategy is marginalized and ridiculed whenever it suits their purposes. The Cabal at the top control the mainstream media, which is little if any help to us. We even have people like computer mogul Bill Gates advocating population control and outright genocide through the medical system. Add to this the fact that the sheeple are continually being dumbed down and outright brainwashed….That’s the situation. It’s a no brainer why the ADIO philisophy may be portrayed as a kind of mystical irrationality. Those who can’t see the problem for what it is are a part of the problem.
You are absolutely correct Rick. The problem is that so many people compartmentalize their thinking. If you get the big idea, all else follows. (I didn’t make up that statement:)
Joe,
I believe the answer is because people either choose to believe or have been conditioned to believe that there is no need for a fully integrated worldview. That you can have one philosophy for one thing, and another for something else. Go to church a on Sunday. Teach evolution in Monday.
By the way, when you say “foundational principle” do you mean the Major Premise? And if so, then you are saying that 82% percent of Americans believe that there is “something’ in all matter that gives to it all of its properties and thus maintains it in existence. If this 82% of the population was polled and asked what they thought this “something” was – what do you think the most common answer might be?
Eric, “fully integrated world view”. Great phrase. Those 82% would porobably describe some sort of deity, which would lead to all kinds of argument, most of which would not be constructive to understanding our chiropractic philosophy unless we could all agree on Who or what the “something” is.
Hey Joe,
This statement completely negates the original question, does it not?
Steve, the original question was:” how did such a small minority manage to gain control of areas such as science and education?” I’m not sure how I “negated” it. I may have given my opinion as to how but I am open to others reasons.
Again I apologies, you negated the premise to the question. “Those 82% would probably describe some sort of deity, which would lead to all kinds of argument, most of which would not be constructive to understanding our chiropractic philosophy” . You started with 82% agree with the MP, now you say they would disagree with each other as to why they agree to the MP and then would therefore be counter productive to our mission.
Steve,
You posted: “Who monopolizes this blog with religious discussions, the minority.” You are correct: It is ALWAYS about the WHO! –
– Faith is beyond deductive reasoning. Chiropractic philosophy is about deductive reasoning. No faith required. –
– Therefore through deductive reasoning, it is reasonable to say: –
– Personal faith has NO place in chiropractic philosophy. – 😉
THANK YOU CLAUDE
AGREED.
“Personal faith has NO place in chiropractic philosophy”
– Not only do i agree with that, but the innate does not necessarily relate God or faith… It does help some understand our innate and MP better, but does not mean Religion and MP go hand in hand. Some kids learn to count to 10 more efficiently by counting cheerios, but that does not mean that counting cheerios make you better at understanding math.