What does it mean when we say that the existence of the innate brain is actual but its location is theoretical?
34 thoughts on “Q&A #26”
don’t understand enough to comment yet. please point the direction where one might learn more about the ‘innate brain’. until then, will stay-tuned right here. good stuff. thank you.
Hey Todd, Greenbooks (Palmer), Bluebooks (Strauss), Whitebooks (Senzon), Whitebook (Reggie),Textbook of Chiropractic Philosophy Sinnott or Stephenson. Most can be found at Sherman College’s bookstore.
I’m not certain but I would say if the innate brain is the same as innate intelligence then it is actual and demonstrable but it’s location is theoretical. This is because it is immaterial. Unlike the educated brain that reasons and calculates this is the other of the intelligence, one being educated intelligence and the other innate intelligence. One differs in its presence/quantity (educated) from person to person whereas the other is always 100%.
Maybe someone can correct this analogy, if it needs correcting..
the location of innate intelligence is similar to a batteries power. If you dissect the battery and ask where is the power located what would your answer be? It just ceases to exist. This is similar to innate intelligence and presumably the innate brain.
Just my interpretation.
These questions are great Joe. I’m wondering where you get them? Students? Emails? I wish there was a place we could post ours. I have a few 😉
still curious though. can we directly correlate ‘innate brain’ with ‘the source of innate intelligence’? or are they two different things? guess the word ‘brain’ (which i’ve always thought of as a physical thing) is the thing in question here. if ‘brain’ and ‘source’ are interchangeable, i like Steve’s response very much.
Todd, Thanks for the compliment but I can’t take credit for that analogy I heard another chiropractor use it. 🙂
Innate intelligence is part of and apart from the universal intelligence. So if you asked what is the source of innate intelligence, I would have to say as a chiropractor, I stop at the major premise and say universal intelligence. (I now tread lightly in this area…Joe and Eric and the others know why 🙂
Lastly, I find that many use the term innate brain and innate mind interchangeably. As far as I know, these are the same but maybe someone else can clarify.
Innate brain and innate mind are two different things. The innate brain is NOT the innate mind. –
– The innate brain is that part of the brain used by innate intelligence, as an organ, in which to assemble mental impulses which are universal forces adapted into innate forces by innate intelligence, as Steve mentioned. –
The innate mind is the activity of innate intelligence in the innate brain as an organ. The result of the activity of innate intelligence in the innate brain is innate force which is the mental impulse. We must remember that the mental impulse is the intent (thought) of innate intelligence sent to the tissue cell for function. –
– Now comes the interesting part. The existence of innate brain is actual but its location is theoretical. Your battery analogy is a good one to start. When you asked: “Where is the power?” We are talking about the activity of innate intelligence which is the innate mind. What Joseph question asked is about the innate brain. It is that part of the brain that is used by innate intelligence to transform universal force (universal power) into innate force (innate power). –
– Further more, the innate brain is an absolutely and irrevocably necessary place and cannot be dis-eased. Now, this clarifies further our understanding of dis-ease which is not at the level of matter, but at the level of force. –
– To help us understand this concept, let us look at the definition of subluxation which points to that fact: “A vertebral subluxation is a vertebra that has lost its juxtaposition with the vertebra above, the one below or both, to an extent less than a luxation, occluding an opening, impinging upon a nerve and interfering the the FLOW OF MENTAL IMPULSE from the brain cell to the tissue cell and vice versa.” –
– It is the FLOW that is lacking ease. It is in a state of dis-ease and will CAUSE a lack of coordination (pri.32 is broken) and innate intelligence becomes further limited due to this further limitation of matter of the body (pri.24). –
– For this reason, the innate brain is what anatomists call “grey matter” and is spread throughout the cells of the body and is not confined only to the physical brain. Therefore, as long as the body is alive, and has “grey matter” within one of its cell (therefore an innate brain), innate intelligence can have activity (therefore an innate mind). The compilation of “grey matter” spread throughout the living body is called the innate brain and its existence is actual but its location is theoretical. –
– Observe a cell phone and show me where is the location, in coordinates on the planet, of the voice of the person using it? It depends where the person is! Which Continent, Country, Sate, Region, County, Town, Street and house. Same concept with the innate brain. –
… then if the person is in a Boeing 747 flying at 500 knots from San Francisco to Melbourne, now tell me the coordinates of the voice of the person using that cell phone! 😉
Hey Claude,
Years ago I read Bj’s statement that innate fibers were unmyelinated. Thinking this was too easy I asked several well respected instructors and teachers, and no one seemed to have any clue. I think he (BJ) stated that educated controlled the white (myelinated) fibers and innate controlled the grey nonmyelinated fibers. Referring back to an earlier post, are sensory nerves myelinated, nonmyelinated or mixed?
I stand corrected. Thanks Dr. Lessard.
Correct me if I am wrong here.
Innate intelligence is metaphysical. It is always 100%.
Innate intelligence adapts universal forces into innate forces.
Innate forces are metaphysical. They are always 100%.
The assembling of mental impulses (innate force) is completed in the innate brain. This is a PHYSICAL (not metaphysical) location in the body and
The activity of the innate intelligence in the innate brain is the innate mind.
Assuming I haven’t gotten anything wrong here, I have 2 questions:
1. With the objective of distinguishing innate mind and innate brain, Could you please elaborate on this,
“We must remember that the mental impulse is the intent (thought) of innate intelligence sent to the tissue cell for function.”?
2. Chiropractors are concerned with the transmission of the mental impulse which is an innate force. The innate intelligence assembles them for use in the body. Does ii assemble universal forces into forces that are not mental impulses? are these the only constructive ones?
Todd,
Thanks for your questions.
The “source of innate intelligence” is universal intelligence. The innate brain is that part of the brain used by innate intelligence, as an organ, in which to assemble mental impulses. The existence of the innate brain is actual. It is literally an organ that innate intelligence uses in the LIVING human body to transform universal forces into innate forces. Therefore, through deductive reasoning we logically conclude that “brain” and source are NOT interchangeable as they are totally different… Innate brain is “the organic computer” used by innate intelligence. Innate brain is controlled by innate intelligence.
I hope this clarifies the issue and answers your questions.
Hey Joe, tough question. At the chance of being way off base and appearing ignorant ( which happens more than I care to admit) I’ll take a shot. Before you respond remember, theoretically I have a brain.
Logically there must be a place (innate brain) where universal forces are converted or transformed into innate forces, just as there is a place( physical brain) for innate forces to be transformed or adapted to physical forces.
Innate intelligence being metaphysical, is everywhere there is life therefore not contained within any anatomical structure.
Regarding myelinated, nonmyelinated or mixed, you were right to ask clarification from your instructors, as you said, it is much too easy. –
– The last 40 years have shown that neuro-transmitters and neuro-receptors were responsible for synaptic exchanges between neurons until scientists found out that imuno-regulators were responsible, until now they are not quite sure HOW it happens. You are right in stating that documented facts change rapidly. This is one more case in point. –
– We are dealing with metaphysical interacting with physical and it seems we will encounter these “conflicts” regularly. The ultimate fact remains that the foundation of chiropractic is based on the OBSERVATION of the organization of the universe and enunciated as the major premise and from the major premise deductive reasoning enunciated 32 principles. –
– Therefore, it is fair to say that empiricism and ADIO world are two very different paths and can ONLY be reconcile through OBSERVATION of reality without judgment. –
– In other words, WHAT is… IS. –
– WHO we choose to BE with WHAT is, makes all the difference in the world. 😉
Claude,
You wrote, “…. empiricism and ADIO worldview are two different paths…”. It seems to me that ADIO and OIBU are the two different paths, empiricism is merely one of the three “vehicles” used to move along that path (rationalism and faith being the other two). Example: Darwin saw changes in a finch’s beak (empirical evidence) and concluded the cause was outside-in forces, plus time, plus chance. The ADIO viewpoint sees the same empirical evidence and concludes adaptation, the 3rd sign of life and life being the expression of intelligence through matter. Amazing isn’t it!
I like your “path” analogy though. We all see two paths in the woods (ADIO&OIBU). We in chiropractic seem to be taking the “one less travelled”. One of our jobs as chiropractors is to tell the masses “standing at the fork”, the beauty and fulfillment of taking the ADIO path. At times, as the terrain of that path changes, different vehicles are more appropriate than others.
OF COURSE! This is a good checking on my slipping! Thank you!
It is so easy to slip on this “slippery slope”. That’s probably WHY it is the path less travelled. I rather follow the ADIO path and slip than follow the OIBU and crash! Thanks again for having my “back”! 😉
Documented Scientific Fact:
When people are clinically dead (no heart or brain function) and are successful revived, they often return with memories of what went on around them while they were “coded-out” (visual and auditory memories) from a point of view away from, or above their bodes.
Take home lesson – apparently you do not need eyes, ears, or a physical brain to see, hear, or process and record a memory. Process this bit a fact for a while!
Hey Eric,
Are we off thread again? Anyway, Documented scientific fact(s) change daily. How long ago was death defined as no fog on the mirror, then no pulse? Just because some technician can’t measure activity doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
Take home lesson, don’t believe everything you measure, you’re only as good as your tools.
My post was about “evidence” for the existence for “non-localized/virtual” phenomena normally associated with anatomical brain function. Very appropriate to Joe’s question.
Our friends in the orthodox medical/neurological realm would have us believe that whatever it is about the brain that organizes the matter of the body and gives rise to consciousness is inherent to the matter of the brain alone. Our founders on the other hand understood that it was the projection of the spiritual realm into the material world that actually creates consciousness and organization
The “traditional” answer to Joe’s question is that because our founders were really talking about the unification spiritual and anatomical phenomena they could not possible identify a place where this happens in the brain because one half of the equation is seated in the non-physical realm. The emerging science of the “near-death experience” and its compelling evidence of the non-localized nature of consciousness, in my opinion, is shedding positive light on aspects of traditional/authentic chiropractic philosophy.
Hey Joe,
Good point, there would have to be electrical brain activity to “cause” the generation of the neuropeptides. Innate brain would have to direct educated brain to produce these chemicals, would it not?
Hey Eric
About this theory of “non-localized/virtual” phenomena, how do we know the sensory system does not continue to function after so called medical death. Just as hair and fingernails continue to grow until the chemicals involved are fully reacted out or used up. Again comes the conflict of science and religion. Just because we can not identify something scientifically does not mean it must be spiritual. It just means we don’t know, yet.
sorry this comment goes below
P.S. While you are processing my last post, also contemplate what “YOU” actually are, and where “YOU” actually are while doing the processing.
– Innate intelligence uses the innate brain which is actual with a theoretical location to transform universal forces into innate forces. That activity is called the innate mind. –
– Innate forces are MENTAL impulses within the LIVING human body. This means that MENTAL impulses are impulses with INTELLIGENT direction and as such are the “intent” (thoughts) of innate intelligence to fulfill principles #21, 23, 32 and 33. Pretty much like when you direct a practice member from your reception room to your adjusting room. Your “command” to your practice member has intelligent direction (you are not directing her to the education room) by telling her where to go. It is your “intent” (thought) translated into your command that moves your practice member from your reception room to your adjusting room. You (ii) uses your brain and vocal cords in a theoretical location “somewhere in your office” (ib) to command the activity of your intent/thought (im) to the practice member to move from the reception room to the adjusting room (principle of coordination), I do know that examples oftentimes breakdown in attempting to make an analogy. I hope you can follow the logic on this one. 🙂 –
– Regarding your second question, innate forces ARE mental impulses in the LIVING human body and are ALWAYS constructive (pri.25 and 26). –
– Your third question, “are these the only constructive ones?” The answer is YES! We must remember that there may be other ways of transmission of innate forces that the innate intelligence of the body uses to carry on principles #21, 32 and 33. As you stated so well Don, chiropractors are concerned with the transmission of the mental impulse which is an innate force… more specifically, chiropractors are concerned with the interference with the transmission of innate forces in the LIVING human body that are ALWAYS directly or INDIRECTLY due to vertebral subluxations (pri.31). The word indirectly allows the possibility of other ways of transmissions ( that’s the GENIUS of the 33 principles enunciated in 1927!). 😉
Thank you Dr. Lessard. Your “office” example has clarified the difference between ib and im for me.
Innate force is synonymous with mental impulse and both are used interchangeably. I assume there is no difference..?
Lastly, I think I already know the answer to this but in the living human body are there any other innate forces under the direction of the ii other than the innate force/mental impulse?
I assume these would be no concern to the chiropractor but maybe you can explain. Thanks.
I gather from your example this is correct Dr. Lessard?
The question marks indicate where it broke down for me 🙂
office=grey matter (actual location)
chiropractor (me) = innate intelligence
PM = ??tissue cell
“somewhere in your office” (theoretical location) = innate brain
activity of producing the command to the PM = innate mind
my voice with intelligent direction = ??mental impulse
Vertebral subluxation = insanely loud Muzak in the office interferring with the transmission of your command? 😉
YOU are so cool. Do you play insanely loud Muzak in your office? 😉
– Are ALL mental impulses innate forces? YES! –
– Are ALL innate forces mental impulses? NO! –
– There is plenty of evidence that points to neuropeptides which are protein-like molecules located in the brain. That’s HOW one part of the brain communicates with another part. Neuropeptides are the equivalent of thoughts, feelings, emotions, desires, instincts, drives, ideas, etc… Anytime you have an idea, or concept, or a notion, immediately there is the generation of these neuropeptides in the brain. The neuropeptide is like a messenger molecule. It’s like a key that fits into a lock. There are other cells in other parts of the brain that have receptors to them and the neuropeptides fit into these receptors and that’s HOW the message is delivered, and that message is translated into a chemical response in other brain cells. That’s HOW brain cells communicate with each other. These neuropeptides that are transmitted through neurotransmitters and received by neuroreceptors are innate forces. –
– Can there be interference with the transmission of neuropeptides in the LIVING body? Absolutely (pri.29). –
– Can vertebral subluxation interferes with transmission of neuropeptides in the LIVING human body? YES, though indirectly by breaking principles #32 and #33 which further limits the matter of the body (pri.24). –
– You are correct in assuming that these are of no concern to the chiropractor anymore than you would be concerned about the amount of insulin, bile or adrenalin needed moment to moment in the LIVING human body. –
– The Chiropractor is ONLY concerned with practicing the objective of chiropractic which is to LACVS for a full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. 🙂
Can vertebral subluxation interferes with transmission of neuropeptides in the LIVING human body? YES, though indirectly by furthering the limits of the matter of the LIVING body (pri.24) and breaking principles #32 and #33.-
My native language oftentimes takes over by thinking “backwards” 😉
Claude,
How can neuropeptides which are matter also be innate forces? Doesn’t that violate the seperation of the Triune, making matter and force the same thing?
HOW do innate forces manifest themselves in a grain of wheat or a blade of grass? Specially WHEN a grain of wheat has been buried in the tomb of an Egyptian 3000 years ago and if you plant it into soil, it grows into wheat.
I wonder WHAT Joseph thinks…
Hey Joe,
Good point, there would have to be electrical brain activity to “cause” the generation of the neuropeptides. Innate brain would have to direct educated brain to produce these chemicals, would it not?
They can’t. What I “inferred” was that it is the configuration of electrons, protons and neutrons that are propelling neuropeptides within the parts of brain that are the innate forces and I’m not sure they’re mental impulses. I said it incorrectly. Neuropeptides are NOT innate forces. They are a step different than “energy” configured into protein-like molecules. It gets slippery at times on this “path” less traveled.
The point I am attempting to make is that we don’t “think”, we don’t “feel” and we don”t “emote” with only our brain alone. Intelligence has escaped the confined of the brain. We have an integrated functioning LIVING body immersed in a pool of intelligence. It is in that “pool” that intelligence is expressed through matter which is the chiropractic meaning of life (pri.2). The union between intelligence and matter is the function of force (pri.10) and is life (pri.3) within the limits of adaptation (pri.24). Every cell of the LIVING human body is a “thinking” cell.
BJ wrote in the “Bigness of the Fellow Within” that innate intelligence was located in the brain. Well, with these new findings, we can’t follow this reasoning any longer. It becomes faulty reasoning now. Every cell of the LIVING human body is an intelligent cell (pri.2).
My opinion is that there probably are other manifestations of innate forces besides the mental impulse within the LIVING human body.
don’t understand enough to comment yet. please point the direction where one might learn more about the ‘innate brain’. until then, will stay-tuned right here. good stuff. thank you.
Hey Todd, Greenbooks (Palmer), Bluebooks (Strauss), Whitebooks (Senzon), Whitebook (Reggie),Textbook of Chiropractic Philosophy Sinnott or Stephenson. Most can be found at Sherman College’s bookstore.
I’m not certain but I would say if the innate brain is the same as innate intelligence then it is actual and demonstrable but it’s location is theoretical. This is because it is immaterial. Unlike the educated brain that reasons and calculates this is the other of the intelligence, one being educated intelligence and the other innate intelligence. One differs in its presence/quantity (educated) from person to person whereas the other is always 100%.
Maybe someone can correct this analogy, if it needs correcting..
the location of innate intelligence is similar to a batteries power. If you dissect the battery and ask where is the power located what would your answer be? It just ceases to exist. This is similar to innate intelligence and presumably the innate brain.
Just my interpretation.
These questions are great Joe. I’m wondering where you get them? Students? Emails? I wish there was a place we could post ours. I have a few 😉
love the battery analogy Don.
still curious though. can we directly correlate ‘innate brain’ with ‘the source of innate intelligence’? or are they two different things? guess the word ‘brain’ (which i’ve always thought of as a physical thing) is the thing in question here. if ‘brain’ and ‘source’ are interchangeable, i like Steve’s response very much.
Todd, Thanks for the compliment but I can’t take credit for that analogy I heard another chiropractor use it. 🙂
Innate intelligence is part of and apart from the universal intelligence. So if you asked what is the source of innate intelligence, I would have to say as a chiropractor, I stop at the major premise and say universal intelligence. (I now tread lightly in this area…Joe and Eric and the others know why 🙂
Lastly, I find that many use the term innate brain and innate mind interchangeably. As far as I know, these are the same but maybe someone else can clarify.
Don,
Innate brain and innate mind are two different things. The innate brain is NOT the innate mind. –
– The innate brain is that part of the brain used by innate intelligence, as an organ, in which to assemble mental impulses which are universal forces adapted into innate forces by innate intelligence, as Steve mentioned. –
The innate mind is the activity of innate intelligence in the innate brain as an organ. The result of the activity of innate intelligence in the innate brain is innate force which is the mental impulse. We must remember that the mental impulse is the intent (thought) of innate intelligence sent to the tissue cell for function. –
– Now comes the interesting part. The existence of innate brain is actual but its location is theoretical. Your battery analogy is a good one to start. When you asked: “Where is the power?” We are talking about the activity of innate intelligence which is the innate mind. What Joseph question asked is about the innate brain. It is that part of the brain that is used by innate intelligence to transform universal force (universal power) into innate force (innate power). –
– Further more, the innate brain is an absolutely and irrevocably necessary place and cannot be dis-eased. Now, this clarifies further our understanding of dis-ease which is not at the level of matter, but at the level of force. –
– To help us understand this concept, let us look at the definition of subluxation which points to that fact: “A vertebral subluxation is a vertebra that has lost its juxtaposition with the vertebra above, the one below or both, to an extent less than a luxation, occluding an opening, impinging upon a nerve and interfering the the FLOW OF MENTAL IMPULSE from the brain cell to the tissue cell and vice versa.” –
– It is the FLOW that is lacking ease. It is in a state of dis-ease and will CAUSE a lack of coordination (pri.32 is broken) and innate intelligence becomes further limited due to this further limitation of matter of the body (pri.24). –
– For this reason, the innate brain is what anatomists call “grey matter” and is spread throughout the cells of the body and is not confined only to the physical brain. Therefore, as long as the body is alive, and has “grey matter” within one of its cell (therefore an innate brain), innate intelligence can have activity (therefore an innate mind). The compilation of “grey matter” spread throughout the living body is called the innate brain and its existence is actual but its location is theoretical. –
– Observe a cell phone and show me where is the location, in coordinates on the planet, of the voice of the person using it? It depends where the person is! Which Continent, Country, Sate, Region, County, Town, Street and house. Same concept with the innate brain. –
… then if the person is in a Boeing 747 flying at 500 knots from San Francisco to Melbourne, now tell me the coordinates of the voice of the person using that cell phone! 😉
Hey Claude,
Years ago I read Bj’s statement that innate fibers were unmyelinated. Thinking this was too easy I asked several well respected instructors and teachers, and no one seemed to have any clue. I think he (BJ) stated that educated controlled the white (myelinated) fibers and innate controlled the grey nonmyelinated fibers. Referring back to an earlier post, are sensory nerves myelinated, nonmyelinated or mixed?
I stand corrected. Thanks Dr. Lessard.
Correct me if I am wrong here.
Innate intelligence is metaphysical. It is always 100%.
Innate intelligence adapts universal forces into innate forces.
Innate forces are metaphysical. They are always 100%.
The assembling of mental impulses (innate force) is completed in the innate brain. This is a PHYSICAL (not metaphysical) location in the body and
The activity of the innate intelligence in the innate brain is the innate mind.
Assuming I haven’t gotten anything wrong here, I have 2 questions:
1. With the objective of distinguishing innate mind and innate brain, Could you please elaborate on this,
“We must remember that the mental impulse is the intent (thought) of innate intelligence sent to the tissue cell for function.”?
2. Chiropractors are concerned with the transmission of the mental impulse which is an innate force. The innate intelligence assembles them for use in the body. Does ii assemble universal forces into forces that are not mental impulses? are these the only constructive ones?
Todd,
Thanks for your questions.
The “source of innate intelligence” is universal intelligence. The innate brain is that part of the brain used by innate intelligence, as an organ, in which to assemble mental impulses. The existence of the innate brain is actual. It is literally an organ that innate intelligence uses in the LIVING human body to transform universal forces into innate forces. Therefore, through deductive reasoning we logically conclude that “brain” and source are NOT interchangeable as they are totally different… Innate brain is “the organic computer” used by innate intelligence. Innate brain is controlled by innate intelligence.
I hope this clarifies the issue and answers your questions.
Hey Joe, tough question. At the chance of being way off base and appearing ignorant ( which happens more than I care to admit) I’ll take a shot. Before you respond remember, theoretically I have a brain.
Logically there must be a place (innate brain) where universal forces are converted or transformed into innate forces, just as there is a place( physical brain) for innate forces to be transformed or adapted to physical forces.
Innate intelligence being metaphysical, is everywhere there is life therefore not contained within any anatomical structure.
Steve,
Regarding myelinated, nonmyelinated or mixed, you were right to ask clarification from your instructors, as you said, it is much too easy. –
– The last 40 years have shown that neuro-transmitters and neuro-receptors were responsible for synaptic exchanges between neurons until scientists found out that imuno-regulators were responsible, until now they are not quite sure HOW it happens. You are right in stating that documented facts change rapidly. This is one more case in point. –
– We are dealing with metaphysical interacting with physical and it seems we will encounter these “conflicts” regularly. The ultimate fact remains that the foundation of chiropractic is based on the OBSERVATION of the organization of the universe and enunciated as the major premise and from the major premise deductive reasoning enunciated 32 principles. –
– Therefore, it is fair to say that empiricism and ADIO world are two very different paths and can ONLY be reconcile through OBSERVATION of reality without judgment. –
– In other words, WHAT is… IS. –
– WHO we choose to BE with WHAT is, makes all the difference in the world. 😉
…. empiricism and ADIO worldview are two different paths…
Claude,
You wrote, “…. empiricism and ADIO worldview are two different paths…”. It seems to me that ADIO and OIBU are the two different paths, empiricism is merely one of the three “vehicles” used to move along that path (rationalism and faith being the other two). Example: Darwin saw changes in a finch’s beak (empirical evidence) and concluded the cause was outside-in forces, plus time, plus chance. The ADIO viewpoint sees the same empirical evidence and concludes adaptation, the 3rd sign of life and life being the expression of intelligence through matter. Amazing isn’t it!
I like your “path” analogy though. We all see two paths in the woods (ADIO&OIBU). We in chiropractic seem to be taking the “one less travelled”. One of our jobs as chiropractors is to tell the masses “standing at the fork”, the beauty and fulfillment of taking the ADIO path. At times, as the terrain of that path changes, different vehicles are more appropriate than others.
Joseph,
OF COURSE! This is a good checking on my slipping! Thank you!
It is so easy to slip on this “slippery slope”. That’s probably WHY it is the path less travelled. I rather follow the ADIO path and slip than follow the OIBU and crash! Thanks again for having my “back”! 😉
Documented Scientific Fact:
When people are clinically dead (no heart or brain function) and are successful revived, they often return with memories of what went on around them while they were “coded-out” (visual and auditory memories) from a point of view away from, or above their bodes.
Take home lesson – apparently you do not need eyes, ears, or a physical brain to see, hear, or process and record a memory. Process this bit a fact for a while!
Hey Eric,
Are we off thread again? Anyway, Documented scientific fact(s) change daily. How long ago was death defined as no fog on the mirror, then no pulse? Just because some technician can’t measure activity doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
Take home lesson, don’t believe everything you measure, you’re only as good as your tools.
Not at all Steve…
My post was about “evidence” for the existence for “non-localized/virtual” phenomena normally associated with anatomical brain function. Very appropriate to Joe’s question.
Our friends in the orthodox medical/neurological realm would have us believe that whatever it is about the brain that organizes the matter of the body and gives rise to consciousness is inherent to the matter of the brain alone. Our founders on the other hand understood that it was the projection of the spiritual realm into the material world that actually creates consciousness and organization
The “traditional” answer to Joe’s question is that because our founders were really talking about the unification spiritual and anatomical phenomena they could not possible identify a place where this happens in the brain because one half of the equation is seated in the non-physical realm. The emerging science of the “near-death experience” and its compelling evidence of the non-localized nature of consciousness, in my opinion, is shedding positive light on aspects of traditional/authentic chiropractic philosophy.
Hey Joe,
Good point, there would have to be electrical brain activity to “cause” the generation of the neuropeptides. Innate brain would have to direct educated brain to produce these chemicals, would it not?
Hey Eric
About this theory of “non-localized/virtual” phenomena, how do we know the sensory system does not continue to function after so called medical death. Just as hair and fingernails continue to grow until the chemicals involved are fully reacted out or used up. Again comes the conflict of science and religion. Just because we can not identify something scientifically does not mean it must be spiritual. It just means we don’t know, yet.
sorry this comment goes below
P.S. While you are processing my last post, also contemplate what “YOU” actually are, and where “YOU” actually are while doing the processing.
Thank you Eric!
I AM 😉
Don,
These questions are excellent!
– Innate intelligence uses the innate brain which is actual with a theoretical location to transform universal forces into innate forces. That activity is called the innate mind. –
– Innate forces are MENTAL impulses within the LIVING human body. This means that MENTAL impulses are impulses with INTELLIGENT direction and as such are the “intent” (thoughts) of innate intelligence to fulfill principles #21, 23, 32 and 33. Pretty much like when you direct a practice member from your reception room to your adjusting room. Your “command” to your practice member has intelligent direction (you are not directing her to the education room) by telling her where to go. It is your “intent” (thought) translated into your command that moves your practice member from your reception room to your adjusting room. You (ii) uses your brain and vocal cords in a theoretical location “somewhere in your office” (ib) to command the activity of your intent/thought (im) to the practice member to move from the reception room to the adjusting room (principle of coordination), I do know that examples oftentimes breakdown in attempting to make an analogy. I hope you can follow the logic on this one. 🙂 –
– Regarding your second question, innate forces ARE mental impulses in the LIVING human body and are ALWAYS constructive (pri.25 and 26). –
– Your third question, “are these the only constructive ones?” The answer is YES! We must remember that there may be other ways of transmission of innate forces that the innate intelligence of the body uses to carry on principles #21, 32 and 33. As you stated so well Don, chiropractors are concerned with the transmission of the mental impulse which is an innate force… more specifically, chiropractors are concerned with the interference with the transmission of innate forces in the LIVING human body that are ALWAYS directly or INDIRECTLY due to vertebral subluxations (pri.31). The word indirectly allows the possibility of other ways of transmissions ( that’s the GENIUS of the 33 principles enunciated in 1927!). 😉
Thank you Dr. Lessard. Your “office” example has clarified the difference between ib and im for me.
Innate force is synonymous with mental impulse and both are used interchangeably. I assume there is no difference..?
Lastly, I think I already know the answer to this but in the living human body are there any other innate forces under the direction of the ii other than the innate force/mental impulse?
I assume these would be no concern to the chiropractor but maybe you can explain. Thanks.
I gather from your example this is correct Dr. Lessard?
The question marks indicate where it broke down for me 🙂
office=grey matter (actual location)
chiropractor (me) = innate intelligence
PM = ??tissue cell
“somewhere in your office” (theoretical location) = innate brain
activity of producing the command to the PM = innate mind
my voice with intelligent direction = ??mental impulse
Vertebral subluxation = insanely loud Muzak in the office interferring with the transmission of your command? 😉
Don,
YOU are so cool. Do you play insanely loud Muzak in your office? 😉
– Are ALL mental impulses innate forces? YES! –
– Are ALL innate forces mental impulses? NO! –
– There is plenty of evidence that points to neuropeptides which are protein-like molecules located in the brain. That’s HOW one part of the brain communicates with another part. Neuropeptides are the equivalent of thoughts, feelings, emotions, desires, instincts, drives, ideas, etc… Anytime you have an idea, or concept, or a notion, immediately there is the generation of these neuropeptides in the brain. The neuropeptide is like a messenger molecule. It’s like a key that fits into a lock. There are other cells in other parts of the brain that have receptors to them and the neuropeptides fit into these receptors and that’s HOW the message is delivered, and that message is translated into a chemical response in other brain cells. That’s HOW brain cells communicate with each other. These neuropeptides that are transmitted through neurotransmitters and received by neuroreceptors are innate forces. –
– Can there be interference with the transmission of neuropeptides in the LIVING body? Absolutely (pri.29). –
– Can vertebral subluxation interferes with transmission of neuropeptides in the LIVING human body? YES, though indirectly by breaking principles #32 and #33 which further limits the matter of the body (pri.24). –
– You are correct in assuming that these are of no concern to the chiropractor anymore than you would be concerned about the amount of insulin, bile or adrenalin needed moment to moment in the LIVING human body. –
– The Chiropractor is ONLY concerned with practicing the objective of chiropractic which is to LACVS for a full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. 🙂
Better said:
Can vertebral subluxation interferes with transmission of neuropeptides in the LIVING human body? YES, though indirectly by furthering the limits of the matter of the LIVING body (pri.24) and breaking principles #32 and #33.-
My native language oftentimes takes over by thinking “backwards” 😉
The Chemistry of Life revisited. 🙂
Thank you for clarifying that Dr. Lessard.
Claude,
How can neuropeptides which are matter also be innate forces? Doesn’t that violate the seperation of the Triune, making matter and force the same thing?
Now, I’m really wondering… does ii assemble universal forces into forces that are not mental impulses?
Don,
HOW do innate forces manifest themselves in a grain of wheat or a blade of grass? Specially WHEN a grain of wheat has been buried in the tomb of an Egyptian 3000 years ago and if you plant it into soil, it grows into wheat.
I wonder WHAT Joseph thinks…
Hey Joe,
Good point, there would have to be electrical brain activity to “cause” the generation of the neuropeptides. Innate brain would have to direct educated brain to produce these chemicals, would it not?
Joseph,
They can’t. What I “inferred” was that it is the configuration of electrons, protons and neutrons that are propelling neuropeptides within the parts of brain that are the innate forces and I’m not sure they’re mental impulses. I said it incorrectly. Neuropeptides are NOT innate forces. They are a step different than “energy” configured into protein-like molecules. It gets slippery at times on this “path” less traveled.
The point I am attempting to make is that we don’t “think”, we don’t “feel” and we don”t “emote” with only our brain alone. Intelligence has escaped the confined of the brain. We have an integrated functioning LIVING body immersed in a pool of intelligence. It is in that “pool” that intelligence is expressed through matter which is the chiropractic meaning of life (pri.2). The union between intelligence and matter is the function of force (pri.10) and is life (pri.3) within the limits of adaptation (pri.24). Every cell of the LIVING human body is a “thinking” cell.
BJ wrote in the “Bigness of the Fellow Within” that innate intelligence was located in the brain. Well, with these new findings, we can’t follow this reasoning any longer. It becomes faulty reasoning now. Every cell of the LIVING human body is an intelligent cell (pri.2).
My opinion is that there probably are other manifestations of innate forces besides the mental impulse within the LIVING human body.