Does the concept of innate to innate communication violate Principle No. 24 (….innate intelligence is limited by limitations of matter.)?
Does the concept of innate to innate communication violate Principle No. 24 (….innate intelligence is limited by limitations of matter.)?
Yes. And more than that, Innate Intelligence is a principle of organization, not some type of mystical cosmic wisdom that whispers in our ears and/or guides us.
We’ve all experienced the unspoken moments of “communication” between us from time to time, but to attribute such to Innate shows a gross misunderstanding of the our philosophy. Innate is busy running my gall blader, heart and lungs….he/she has enough to do.
I always got a pain in my stomach when speakers at various programs in Chiropractic promised that they had not prepared anything to talk about, but that they would “just be letting Innate flow”…..goodness…..only God can let Innate flow….thus all their utterings would be as words from God???????lol
exactly…
Does innate run your mind as well, do you use your mind to communicate? Is it not possible that for some reasons innate may bypass the educated mind. If plants and animals are sensitive to positive and negative emotions why wouldn’t innate be able to pick up and interpret these nonphysical signals as well. Tell me you have never “known” a patient was going to be subluxated before your precheck, or “known” they were clear before your postcheck. Would you call that intuition? By the way, personification of innate intelligence is also a common misunderstanding of our philosophy. Principles and functions do not have a sex.
Chiropractic philosophy uses the term “mind” to describe the activity in the educated brain. I assume that is how you are using it. Ii bypasses the EB all the time an communicates directly with innate body (thank goodness). Positive and negative emotions change body chemistry. That changes the environment of the plant or animal. Perhaps because plants and animals do not have an e.b. to adapt them to their external environment, their matter is more sensitive to the environment, just as a dog’s hearing is more sensitive. That is a function of the matter, not the intelligence. I don’t think I’ve ever thought/intuited about whether a PM was subluxated or not. I just LACVS when and if I find them.
If animals do not have an educated mind, how do they learn?
ii does “imprint” on the matter, which may be what instinct is but I am not sure that they do not have some sort of (limited) educated brain.
Joseph,
Don’t you think that the mere fact that it is an educated brain it is limited not only in animals but in humans as well? Or were you speaking of degree of limitation between human beings and animals… even though I would venture to believe that some animals have less educated brain limitations as some people sometimes. 🙂
Absolutely Claude. Isn’t it great to know that as relative as the educated brain is (from genius IQ to room temperature IQ), innate intelligence is always 100% in all of us.
Well said!
It depends on your definition of ii. The traditional concept taught by BJ and his contemporaries was that ii was a fragment of ui concerned with living things. As ui was all knowing so was innate. He spoke and wrote many times of the wee small voice that guided him in life. Thought flashes were described as innate communication from the innate mind to the educated mind. His disdain for the term “subconscious” which inferred inferiority , and preference for the term superconscious well described his opinion of ii. In other writings BJ (as have others) described multiple forms or levels of communication within and beyond the physical body. Therefore, unless you can attribute nonphysical communication to the educated, it must be an innate function.
Today’s version of our philosophy limits innate to the skin,the matter. Perhaps we impose an artificial barrier according to our present understanding, a physical barrier to a metaphysical concept.
If ii is limited by Lof M, then the greatest limitation is the fact that bodies are not connected. If they are connected then it is not ii to ii. It is only one ii. (yes Siamese, whoops, cojoined twins only have one ii.). I believe BJs “wee small voice” was his educated brain expressing itself without interference (VS, Mabel, the worries of the PSC). He says it often happened at night, probaby when distracions were at a minimum. There may very well be other forms of communication between people that is educated like telepathy. , I don’t know. There may be supernatural forces at work. There may also be an intelligence above ii. Did you ever see a flock of birds all change direction at the same time…flock intelligence? Fortunately, our objective limits our philosophy to LACVS to enable improved ii function and nothing more.
If I am not mistaken ii is not limited by matter, for it is always 100%. The force of innate is limited by the matter that conveys it, and the body is limited by the matter or structure from which it is made. We are told that innate is always aware of what goes on in the body, with or without subluxations.
Experiments in telepathy show distant results with or without recipient awareness of the message being sent. If you were to pray for a nonchristian, would they still reap the benefits? If someone is unaware of a telepathic transmission, yet responds to that message, it would seem educated is not involved.
Steve, you’re going to have to take your problem with Principle No. 24 up with somebody else. It’s above my paygrade. I do understand where you are coming from, however. While you are correct because ii is not located anywhere we cannot put limitations on it, we can and do say that the expression of ii is limited by Lof M. I think BJ and others underestood this when they wrote the principles. Because in the Major Premise, for example, they did not say ui is everywhere, since they only could perceive it(its organization) in matter and that was enough. If ui is in non-matter, we have no way of knowing, so we restrict our def. (Prin. #1 )to matter. The same for ii. Further, the ability of ii to be aware of every innate need is also limited by matter and time. Otherwise the ii of the body would prepare ahead of time for every innate need (wouldn’t that be nice) but bacause of L of time and matter, it cannot.
Prayer and telepathy are two totally different things. If I told you about a problem someome was having, could you intercede with their problem without them knowing it was me who explained their plight? (Intercessory) prayer is just one person (me) talking to another Person (God) on behalf of a third person. But that is a supernatural event, which is what telepathy may very well be. Either way it is not natural as we understand natural in our philosophy. Good discussion!
That’s what’s so AMAZING about chiropractic. It uses a major premise and then deduct 32 principles from its start point including princ.24. This is great wisdom that the manifestation of ui can be observed in matter only. It is as simple as giving a long loving look at what’s going on inside and outside of us. That’s enough to be in the flux of constant transformation and growth which is one of the meaning of life.
Are we grateful that somewhere in time there was one simple principle and practice which the human race needed which could and would complete our innermost educated knowledge? And this principle is so simple that it would need to be told only once to get it. That my friend is what chiropractic has to offer to the world. We have no time to waste. Let’s tell the story over and over and over and over again.
Joseph,
You mentioned that there is an innate awareness for every innate need. Yet ii is limited by time and matter. Doesn’t that point to deducting principle #7? “The amount of intelligence for ANY given unit of matter is ALWAYS 100% and is ALWAYS proportional to its requirements” (emphasis mine)… and if so, we could further deduce that ALL matter receives 100% “attention” for its PARTICULAR needs from ii at ALL time? If so, let us deduce that it is the matter which is the determining factor as it constantly changes whereas ii is constantly unchanging. For us, objective straight chiropractors, it is paramount that we focus on simply LACVS which deals with the interference between matter (brain cell) and matter (tissue cell) providing the environment necessary within force to unite intelligence and matter which is the function of force anyway…
I welcome your comments Joseph and everyone else as well.
What is innate intelligence? How would you define it? The law of life? A part of ui and a part from ui? Yet what is universal intelligence? Thom Gelardi took the position that there is only one intelligence. Yet what is the definition of THAT intelligence?
I understand what Enrique is saying by principle of organization… It has to be contained within ui as well in order to maintain all matter in existence, doesn’t it ? It’s the major premise, our start point.
All concepts point to a truth. The concept of ii is not the truth, it is a pointer to a metaphysical process… How do you name that truth? Truth can NEVER be expressed into words. It is beyond the thinking mind. Perhaps our great need to understand and name what is REAL can only be experienced… then words and concepts are not needed any more. Being might be the reality that is… Any thoughts?
WHEEEEW
WHEEEEW is right!
This has to be one of my favorite topics…
That “piece” of innate that I can claim as mine works in my structured matter, as such it has no solicitude for the structured matter of any other organism.
One could argue that just as each unit (cell) of my body has it own ii to rely on when disconnected from the ii of the whole, there may be a bigger “whole” such as species-wide or ecosystem-wide ii from which the individual can be either connected or disconnected. If that is the case, is there a way for us to know when we are connected or disconnected? Can an individual cell “know” that it is not connected to the ii of the body? Could an individual cell with that knowledge contrive a way to remove interference to the communication between a higher degree of organizing consciousness and itself?
Drew, You wrote: “That “piece” of innate that I can claim as mine works in my structured matter, as such it has no solicitude for the structured matter of any other organism.” If they ever decide to add a 34th principle, I’d vote for that statement exactly as you wrote it. Thank you.
And yet, innate intelligence cannot be “pieced” or divided. It is ONE. The same innate intelligence operates my body and the body of all other life forms on this planet. It is the matter that differs. We “own” the matter and we are “owned” by the intelligence. That’s why what you said Drew is so significant. Innate intelligence has solicitude and 100% specific focus for every single piece of living matter of ALL life forms… ALL of the time… at the same time.
A cell which is imperfect matter and disconnected with its perfect intelligence couldn’t even begin to try to contrive a way to remove interference at any level. IT IS DISCONNECTED from the source of life. Practicing the objective of chiropractic which is to LACVS is the only way restore communication within the matter. Once that’s done, a full expression of the innate intelligence of the body is the resultant. Amazing isn’t it?