I would say, based on my understanding thus far, that there is a grey area. In “Chiropractic Philosophy”, you explain that there is the innate brain and the educated brain. In an infant, the educated brain is completely undeveloped, but still he/she instinctively latches on to the breast to feed. If this isn’t an educated decision, then don’t we have to conclude that this instinct is an innate action?
Good point Mike. I think that instinct is an innate action. I like the term “action” because I see instinct as being an expression of intelligence through the matter. I think we need to consider the part the matter plays. It is genetically programmed into the matter for a Canadien Goose to sacrifice its life for its eggs and for a guppy to eat its young. Since the educated brain is an organ of matter, it logically follows that some of that programming may be in the genetic matter of the ed. brain (in humans). We also need to consider that guppys do not have an ed. brain and that ed. brains are subject to Limitations of matter. Lots of factors involved, all of which are part of the matter, the ii is always the same…100%.
Hey Joe,
If I read BJ correctly, instinct is the superstitious term, Innate Intelligence is the enlightened one. Ii. being much more comprehensive. Instinct implies no forethought. Ii. on the other hand includes the idea of it being a purposeful activity, one that is for the greater good of the organism.
When he made the distinction between super-conscious and sub-conscious, he was explaining the magnificence of our inner wisdom as opposed to the idea of basic animal drives.
Steve, it seems to me that “superstitious” is an educated term. Actually I thought that ii always acted “instinctively,’ inasmuch as it has no memory. “Purposeful activity” seems to imply forethought. If ii had to “think afore”, it would need the ability to know and act upon a situation before that situation occurred which would necessitate foreknowledge and memory. I do’t see that as a function of the ii. I do see it as a function of the educated. How would you differentiate “inner wisdom” from “basic animal drives?”
Hey Joe,
Basic animal drive (instinct) promotes breeding with every available female, inner wisdom is expressed in loving only one at a time. So I guess one is a capability the other is ability with volition.
Purposeful may also indicate goal orientated. Ii. is the great adapter whereas instinct implies already programed. As in your comment to Mike, geese and guppies do not always act instinctively in their own best interest. The suicidal goose is not following the dictates of ii. (survival). So has instinct superseded innate? If one can override the other, they are not the same. I do however tend to think animals have somewhat of an educated brain because they can learn.
According to BJ, ii. has memory and passes it down to the next generation. I think it would be better to say ii. learns and adapts would be more correct. Think of all the artificial things in our environment today that ii. never had to deal with before our modern times. How would instinct help us deal with something we have never been exposed to before? In fact our instincts are used against us quite often buy the food industry and others. Otherwise if innate is instinctual then the evolving human form is just a genetic pattern moving through it’s predestined schedule.
Steve, let me respond to your points:
1.Basic animal drive (instinct) promotes breeding with every available female, inner wisdom is expressed in loving only one at a time. So I guess one is a capability the other is ability with volition. “loving only one at a time” is an educated activity, not innate so it does require volition.
2. If instinct is programmed then it must be part of the genetic matter and ii is limited by L of M. I think that an educated in animals is a good discussion and there may be some level of ei.
3.Follow this line Steve, if ii had to learn or had memory then ii was less than 100% at one point and still is less than 100% and will not be 100% until it knows/remembers all. That line of reasoning does not reconcile with our understanding of ii..
Hey Joe,
1. I am not talking about the decision to love just one, but the benefits in achieving the depth of the relationship monogamy brings(pro survival). Inner wisdom tells us this is good.
2. Intelligence adapts (reorganizes) the matter as well, that can not be instinctual if the instinct is in the matter.
3. P.#22 intelligence proportional to it’s organization. If organizational needs change does innate not respond differently?
Steve, my responses:
1. What’s love got to do with it?…(isn’t that the nameof a song). Love has nothing to do with instinct, it’s all educated and not to be mistaken for sexual attraction which is instinctive as well as educated.
2. Don’t understand your point.
3. I understand that principle to mean that ii is always 100% because its need is always 100%. If you have different take on that principle I’d like to hear it.
Ok Joe
1. You love your kids differently than you love your wife, (I hope). I would say it is an inner wisdom that differentiates the two types of love. Not an educated decision.
2. you said instinct is in the genetics, I said ii. organizes the matter which contains the genetics. So ii. is limited by matter and intelligence controls matter within those limitations. So then would ii. ultimately control instinct or the other way around, you tell me?
3. what if needs change, does ii. change. Is cro-magnon man ii the same as our ii today?
Innate intelligence is LAW of LIFE. It is ALWAYS 100% (pri.22). We can reasonably deduce that the LAW of LIFE is perfect. Furthermore, perfection is complete… there nothing to add, nothing to take away, nothing to remember. Innate intelligence ALWAYS acts PERFECTLY according to the need of the moment. –
– Instinct is not ALWAYS perfect. Memory is not ALWAYS perfect. It is dependent on the quantity and quality of the matter. Matter is NEVER perfect. Therefore, we can further reasonably deduce that instinct and memory are intrinsic to matter. As matter evolves from ancestry, innate intelligence adapts matter perfectly according to the NEW evolutionary need requirements. –
– Example: Olympian World Records are broken due to the memory of the matter of the living body as it evolved from slow to fast, weak to strong, etc… Due to technological advancements, training techniques, quality of fabric of clothing, shoes, sporting goods, stadium materials, precision of clock time, computer analysis, etc… improved engineered and built from memory of the past gave rise to perfecting human performance of the human body and shattered world records. The innate intelligence of the LIVING body has NO memory. It is LAW of LIFE. The innate intelligence of the LIVING body adapts universal forces and matter for use in the body, so that all parts of the body will have co-ordinated action for mutual benefit (pri.23). –
– Once again, memory requires encoding, storage and retrieval. Those necessary steps are functions of matter as it expresses the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body (pri.13). That is WHY memory is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of matter present in the LIVING body. Subluxation do interfere with the transmitting matter of the LIVING body and as such, they are furthering an increase of limitation of matter. Memory and instinct are INDIRECTLY interfered by subluxations (pri.31). On the other hand, the innate intelligence of the LIVING body is NOT dependent on anything to adapt universal forces and matter and can NEVER be interfered with since it is PERFECT and ALWAYS 100% (pri.22). –
– Innate intelligence is LAW of life, ALWAYS 100% (pri.22). I repeat, Instinct is a function of matter otherwise, we would all be Beethoven, Shakespeare, Phelps, Einstein… and we are NOT (whether we are subluxated or not). Yet, Beethoven, Shakespeare, Phelps, Einstein have the same innate intelligence than you and me. WHY is it we do not accomplish WHAT they accomplish? Mozart was able to write an entire sonata from beginning to end without erasing one single note. WHAT do you call that? BJ said it was “Innate”. Sorry, buster, it ain’t. Otherwise, BACH could have done that too and NEVER did. Innate intelligence is LAW of LIFE. It is NOT instinct. The green sea turtles of the Galapagos islands hatch and move toward the sea to swim 13,000 miles for years and returned to the same island on the same SOUTH shore (not the NORTH shore) to lay their eggs. The matter of these turtles is WHAT it does instinctively. Turtle do NOT have a choice. It is intrinsic in their nature (read design). The innate intelligence of the turtle adapts universal forces and matter for use in the body of the turtle, so that all parts of the turtle’s body will have co-ordinated action for mutual benefit and accomplish its instinctual fulfill it natural design successfully. –
Dr. Lessard,
I’ve noticed that Dr. Strauss often writes that the NTOSCtor “LACVS for the expression of innate intelligence” and you often write “LACVS for transmission of innate forces”. In your opinion are these the same? Why or why not?
The function of matter is to express force (pri.13). The function of innate intelligence is to adapt universal forces and matter for use in the body, so that all parts of the body will have co-ordinated action for mutual benefit (pri.23). The forces of innate intelligence operate through or over the nerve system in animal bodies (pri.28). There can be interference with the TRANSMISSION of innate forces (pri.29). Interference with the TRANSMISSION in the body is always directly or indirectly due to vertebral subluxation (pri.31). –
– Therefore, we can reasonably deduce that the objective of chiropractic is to LACVS for a full EXPRESSION of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. –
– Moving backward with the principles might further clarify the distinction. VS always interferes with the TRANSMISSION of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body FLOWING through or over the nerve system. Theses innate forces are adapted universal forces by the innate intelligence of the body and are expressed by matter. The function of matter is to express force, NOT intelligence.
– LACVS for a full EXPRESSION of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body is the objective of chiropractic. –
– Joseph and I had conversations about the need to be precise with our lexicon. We both agree that it is for a full EXPRESSION of innate FORCES. Chiropractic philosophy is a “slippery road” and can be confusing at times. We deal with the immaterial and the material… with the physical and the metaphysical. Sometimes I slip my checkings and for brevity I will say for a “better expression of innate intelligence”. Yet, the function of matter is really to express FORCE and not intelligence. So, then, I check my slippings or someone else does that for me. Joseph is very good at this!!! 😉 Therefore, for the sake of accuracy we reasonably deduce: –
– The NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to practice the objective of chiropractic which is to LACVS for a full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. –
Claude, as you have pointed out before, if there is a VS, that part of the body is not LIVING, (even if it is only a few tissues or cells lacking innate forces and hence, not expressing the innate intelligence of the BODY). So doesn’t the living body ALWAYS have a full expression of innate forces. I guess the CONTEXT of your statement is whether you are talking about a body in a state of DIS-EASE or whether you are talking about a corpse….perhaps I am needlessly splitting hairs.
Claude, Would it be more appropriate to say that the NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of life within the LIVING body expressing less than 100% life but more than 0% life? Now I am really splitting hairs!
The body is either dead (having NO innate intelligence of the body) or alive (having innate intelligence of the body). There is NO in-between. Innate intelligence is always 100% (pri.22). What is being expressed by matter is innate force (pri.13) NOT intelligence. Innate force is an adapted universal force which is created by universal intelligence (pri.23). Therefore, we can reasonably deduce that the NTOSC is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body. Notice that force is manifested by motion in matter; all matter has motion, therefore there is universal life in all matter. –
– Joseph, you are bringing up an interesting point by splitting hairs, and is the chiropractic meaning of life. Principle #2 states that it is the expression of this intelligence through matter. Therefore, we can reasonably deduce that it is universal life that is ALWAYS expressed through matter at different “levels”, (NOT life as we know it which is organic life only), meaning the intelligence of the atom, the intelligence of the molecule, the intelligence of the cell, the intelligence of the organ, the intelligence of the system, the innate intelligence of the body. –
– Also, the function of intelligence is ONLY to create FORCE, not matter (pri.8). The function of force is ONLY to unite intelligence and matter (pri.10). The function of matter is ONLY to express force (pri.13). And universal intelligence gives force to both organic and inorganic matter (pri.16). Here is my question to EVERYONE: –
– WHERE does matter come from and which chiropractic principle enunciates WHAT is it that has the function ONLY to create matter?
Claude, Claude, Claude, after I said just the other day we would not be getting into theological discussions, you ask a theological question.:) Nothing in the 33 chiropractic principles addresses the issue of the creation of matter.
Hey Joe,
Could we stop at “the NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of life”?
Definition of Instinct…the innate aspect of behavior that is unlearned, complex and normally adaptive. Does ii, have a complex understanding of adaptive responses to nature, to assure the contiuation of life?
Dr. Lessard,
Thanks for clarifying.
To answer your question, I think it is appropriate since the expression of intelligence through matter is the Chiropractic meaning of life. (Prin. 2).
I will say that Dr. Strauss has mentioned before on this blog that while the statements are true, he thinks there is a problem with making statements without the proper context.
I guess I see it as similar to my question about the appropriateness of stating “SUBLUXATIONS KILL”, without the context that it contributes to but is not the SOLE determining factor in the death of a person allows that subject to misinterpretation without further explanation.
Does ALL of what the NTOSChiropractor who chooses to explain the chiropractic objective to the public require context?
Other than one-to-one or group talks, I would assume advertising (unless in brochure format with a complete explanation) would be inefficient for the NTOSChiropractor.
Don,
The first requirement of any philosophical discussion is to define your terms. If we are speaking to others with the same vocabulary, context may not be an issue. But some chiropractors and most lay people do not (or not yet) have our vocabulary and so context is important. Just my thought.
I agree Dr. Strauss. As in the above example even the definition of life is subject to interpretation.
Question:
In your experience what would you say is the most misunderstood term that you would choose to define because they are essential to understanding chiropractic?
I dare say it will not be pain.. 😛
Don,
I think just by reading this thread we can see that the most misunderstood term that one could choose to define is life. With what has been said on this thread, I wonder if anyone reading this blog has any idea what we are talking about! Part of the problem is how the Palmers defined life. Principle # 1 is referring to existance. Actually so is #2 thru #16, so perhaps in discussing our objective as chiropractors we should not even be quoting the first 16 principle except where they are appropriate in discussing the existance of matter. What we relate to in chiropractic does not begin until #18 at the earliest. So even our use of the word “life” is confusing unless we understand it in the context that we are talking about (the expression of ii through matter, ie. living matter and not ui through non living matter.) Principle #4, The Triune of Life in the context of the 33 principles is not even referring to living organisms but all matter whether it expresses universal life (only existance) or innate life (manifesting one or more of the signs of life)…Prin. #18. We, perhaps need a new term to define univesal matter and what is represented by the first 16 principles and innate matter, that which is organized on a level that allows it to reorganize itself. There, that should clear everything up for everybody! Duh 🙂
Steve,
From the 33 principles, it is faulty reasoning to say that the NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of life. A corpse has the chiropractic meaning of life within itself, so is dust in a coffin. That’s what it means to maintain matter in EXISTENCE. Principles #2 talks about the EXISTENCE of matter as being the meaning of life which is the expression of universal intelligence THROUGH matter. –
– So you see that even with or without subluxations the matter of the body is maintained in existence. Matter either exist or it does not. No in-between. LACVS does NOT give full expression of existence which is the chiropractic meaning of life as principle #2 was deduced from #1. –
– Deduced from principles 13, 29 and 31 we reasonably enunciate the objective of chiropractic as LACVS for a full EXPRESSION of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the LIVING body. PERIOD.
Dr. Strauss and others reading this,
I’m now in the process of developing a nontherapeutic chiropractic npm orientation but am not finding this easy. Coming from a therapeutic chiropractic frame of mind to this one is a difficult transition. My mind wants to start at explaining the vs and move directly into the benefits of getting them corrected (as if we can expect any beyond the full expression of innate forces of ii) and onto why.
I’m not even sure I would ever choose to get into Dr. Lessard’s example of the corpse having the chiropractic meaning of life (as true as that is 🙂
I can already predict Dr. Lessard writing that my program is going to be a reflection of WHO I choose to be. 😉
but could any of you please give me a sense of the key big concepts and timing that you have found to be efective in your nontherapeutic practices.
I’ll start.. as it is now I use an active listening approach.
1. quick anatomy of the spine and nerve system
2. what a vs is
3. why vs is silent and disastrous (messages from brain to body not 100%)
3. what can cause vs (EVERYTHING!! internal <external resist.force)
4. When to get them corrected (answer: immediately!)
5. For how long (answer:the rest of your life)
Thanks!
Dr. Lessard,
I thought you’d say that…
Question: You mentioned that on day one you’d ask the npm whether they would like to live with vs or live without then wait for a response.
Last year I gave a talk to the GSCS to help their members create, as a group, a blueprint for a philosophical, practical and educational program for PMs. I remember to have created about 32 visit by visit encounters for their PMs in the 2 hour slot I was allotted. –
– I think that it was recorded on CD. Google GARDEN STATE CHIROPRACTIC SOCIETY and get in touch with the president and ask for a CD of the talk. –
– It’s the same “story” repeated over and over and over and over again, in as many different ways as possible, to create a PERPETUAL conversation with the PMs in a suitable philosophical environment. –
– As as matter of fact, a NTOSChiropractor, in the audience, had what I call an “Ah! Ha!” experience that transformed him. I know he reads this blog quite regularly. Perhaps he will share with the group, WHAT happened to him and HOW, as a result of my choosing WHO it was that I chose to BE at that speaking engagement.
One is the source of life. The other is how this source influences voluntary behavior for the preservation of life.
Innate is the speaker; instinct is the actor.
I would say, based on my understanding thus far, that there is a grey area. In “Chiropractic Philosophy”, you explain that there is the innate brain and the educated brain. In an infant, the educated brain is completely undeveloped, but still he/she instinctively latches on to the breast to feed. If this isn’t an educated decision, then don’t we have to conclude that this instinct is an innate action?
Why would instinct not be an innate function?
Good point Mike. I think that instinct is an innate action. I like the term “action” because I see instinct as being an expression of intelligence through the matter. I think we need to consider the part the matter plays. It is genetically programmed into the matter for a Canadien Goose to sacrifice its life for its eggs and for a guppy to eat its young. Since the educated brain is an organ of matter, it logically follows that some of that programming may be in the genetic matter of the ed. brain (in humans). We also need to consider that guppys do not have an ed. brain and that ed. brains are subject to Limitations of matter. Lots of factors involved, all of which are part of the matter, the ii is always the same…100%.
Hey Joe,
If I read BJ correctly, instinct is the superstitious term, Innate Intelligence is the enlightened one. Ii. being much more comprehensive. Instinct implies no forethought. Ii. on the other hand includes the idea of it being a purposeful activity, one that is for the greater good of the organism.
When he made the distinction between super-conscious and sub-conscious, he was explaining the magnificence of our inner wisdom as opposed to the idea of basic animal drives.
Steve, it seems to me that “superstitious” is an educated term. Actually I thought that ii always acted “instinctively,’ inasmuch as it has no memory. “Purposeful activity” seems to imply forethought. If ii had to “think afore”, it would need the ability to know and act upon a situation before that situation occurred which would necessitate foreknowledge and memory. I do’t see that as a function of the ii. I do see it as a function of the educated. How would you differentiate “inner wisdom” from “basic animal drives?”
Hey Joe,
Basic animal drive (instinct) promotes breeding with every available female, inner wisdom is expressed in loving only one at a time. So I guess one is a capability the other is ability with volition.
Purposeful may also indicate goal orientated. Ii. is the great adapter whereas instinct implies already programed. As in your comment to Mike, geese and guppies do not always act instinctively in their own best interest. The suicidal goose is not following the dictates of ii. (survival). So has instinct superseded innate? If one can override the other, they are not the same. I do however tend to think animals have somewhat of an educated brain because they can learn.
According to BJ, ii. has memory and passes it down to the next generation. I think it would be better to say ii. learns and adapts would be more correct. Think of all the artificial things in our environment today that ii. never had to deal with before our modern times. How would instinct help us deal with something we have never been exposed to before? In fact our instincts are used against us quite often buy the food industry and others. Otherwise if innate is instinctual then the evolving human form is just a genetic pattern moving through it’s predestined schedule.
Steve, let me respond to your points:
1.Basic animal drive (instinct) promotes breeding with every available female, inner wisdom is expressed in loving only one at a time. So I guess one is a capability the other is ability with volition.
“loving only one at a time” is an educated activity, not innate so it does require volition.
2. If instinct is programmed then it must be part of the genetic matter and ii is limited by L of M. I think that an educated in animals is a good discussion and there may be some level of ei.
3.Follow this line Steve, if ii had to learn or had memory then ii was less than 100% at one point and still is less than 100% and will not be 100% until it knows/remembers all. That line of reasoning does not reconcile with our understanding of ii..
Hey Joe,
1. I am not talking about the decision to love just one, but the benefits in achieving the depth of the relationship monogamy brings(pro survival). Inner wisdom tells us this is good.
2. Intelligence adapts (reorganizes) the matter as well, that can not be instinctual if the instinct is in the matter.
3. P.#22 intelligence proportional to it’s organization. If organizational needs change does innate not respond differently?
Steve, my responses:
1. What’s love got to do with it?…(isn’t that the nameof a song). Love has nothing to do with instinct, it’s all educated and not to be mistaken for sexual attraction which is instinctive as well as educated.
2. Don’t understand your point.
3. I understand that principle to mean that ii is always 100% because its need is always 100%. If you have different take on that principle I’d like to hear it.
Ok Joe
1. You love your kids differently than you love your wife, (I hope). I would say it is an inner wisdom that differentiates the two types of love. Not an educated decision.
2. you said instinct is in the genetics, I said ii. organizes the matter which contains the genetics. So ii. is limited by matter and intelligence controls matter within those limitations. So then would ii. ultimately control instinct or the other way around, you tell me?
3. what if needs change, does ii. change. Is cro-magnon man ii the same as our ii today?
Innate intelligence is LAW of LIFE. It is ALWAYS 100% (pri.22). We can reasonably deduce that the LAW of LIFE is perfect. Furthermore, perfection is complete… there nothing to add, nothing to take away, nothing to remember. Innate intelligence ALWAYS acts PERFECTLY according to the need of the moment. –
– Instinct is not ALWAYS perfect. Memory is not ALWAYS perfect. It is dependent on the quantity and quality of the matter. Matter is NEVER perfect. Therefore, we can further reasonably deduce that instinct and memory are intrinsic to matter. As matter evolves from ancestry, innate intelligence adapts matter perfectly according to the NEW evolutionary need requirements. –
– Example: Olympian World Records are broken due to the memory of the matter of the living body as it evolved from slow to fast, weak to strong, etc… Due to technological advancements, training techniques, quality of fabric of clothing, shoes, sporting goods, stadium materials, precision of clock time, computer analysis, etc… improved engineered and built from memory of the past gave rise to perfecting human performance of the human body and shattered world records. The innate intelligence of the LIVING body has NO memory. It is LAW of LIFE. The innate intelligence of the LIVING body adapts universal forces and matter for use in the body, so that all parts of the body will have co-ordinated action for mutual benefit (pri.23). –
– Once again, memory requires encoding, storage and retrieval. Those necessary steps are functions of matter as it expresses the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body (pri.13). That is WHY memory is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of matter present in the LIVING body. Subluxation do interfere with the transmitting matter of the LIVING body and as such, they are furthering an increase of limitation of matter. Memory and instinct are INDIRECTLY interfered by subluxations (pri.31). On the other hand, the innate intelligence of the LIVING body is NOT dependent on anything to adapt universal forces and matter and can NEVER be interfered with since it is PERFECT and ALWAYS 100% (pri.22). –
– Innate intelligence is LAW of life, ALWAYS 100% (pri.22). I repeat, Instinct is a function of matter otherwise, we would all be Beethoven, Shakespeare, Phelps, Einstein… and we are NOT (whether we are subluxated or not). Yet, Beethoven, Shakespeare, Phelps, Einstein have the same innate intelligence than you and me. WHY is it we do not accomplish WHAT they accomplish? Mozart was able to write an entire sonata from beginning to end without erasing one single note. WHAT do you call that? BJ said it was “Innate”. Sorry, buster, it ain’t. Otherwise, BACH could have done that too and NEVER did. Innate intelligence is LAW of LIFE. It is NOT instinct. The green sea turtles of the Galapagos islands hatch and move toward the sea to swim 13,000 miles for years and returned to the same island on the same SOUTH shore (not the NORTH shore) to lay their eggs. The matter of these turtles is WHAT it does instinctively. Turtle do NOT have a choice. It is intrinsic in their nature (read design). The innate intelligence of the turtle adapts universal forces and matter for use in the body of the turtle, so that all parts of the turtle’s body will have co-ordinated action for mutual benefit and accomplish its instinctual fulfill it natural design successfully. –
Last words should read …accomplish the instinctual fulfillment of its natural design successfully.
Dr. Lessard,
I’ve noticed that Dr. Strauss often writes that the NTOSCtor “LACVS for the expression of innate intelligence” and you often write “LACVS for transmission of innate forces”. In your opinion are these the same? Why or why not?
Don,
The function of matter is to express force (pri.13). The function of innate intelligence is to adapt universal forces and matter for use in the body, so that all parts of the body will have co-ordinated action for mutual benefit (pri.23). The forces of innate intelligence operate through or over the nerve system in animal bodies (pri.28). There can be interference with the TRANSMISSION of innate forces (pri.29). Interference with the TRANSMISSION in the body is always directly or indirectly due to vertebral subluxation (pri.31). –
– Therefore, we can reasonably deduce that the objective of chiropractic is to LACVS for a full EXPRESSION of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. –
– Moving backward with the principles might further clarify the distinction. VS always interferes with the TRANSMISSION of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body FLOWING through or over the nerve system. Theses innate forces are adapted universal forces by the innate intelligence of the body and are expressed by matter. The function of matter is to express force, NOT intelligence.
– LACVS for a full EXPRESSION of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body is the objective of chiropractic. –
– Joseph and I had conversations about the need to be precise with our lexicon. We both agree that it is for a full EXPRESSION of innate FORCES. Chiropractic philosophy is a “slippery road” and can be confusing at times. We deal with the immaterial and the material… with the physical and the metaphysical. Sometimes I slip my checkings and for brevity I will say for a “better expression of innate intelligence”. Yet, the function of matter is really to express FORCE and not intelligence. So, then, I check my slippings or someone else does that for me. Joseph is very good at this!!! 😉 Therefore, for the sake of accuracy we reasonably deduce: –
– The NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to practice the objective of chiropractic which is to LACVS for a full expression of the innate forces of the innate intelligence of the body. PERIOD. –
– I hope I have answered your question Don. –
Question for all of us:
Principle #2 states: “The expression of this intelligence through matter is the Chiropractic meaning of life”. —
– Would it be appropriate to say that the NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of life within the LIVING body?
Claude, as you have pointed out before, if there is a VS, that part of the body is not LIVING, (even if it is only a few tissues or cells lacking innate forces and hence, not expressing the innate intelligence of the BODY). So doesn’t the living body ALWAYS have a full expression of innate forces. I guess the CONTEXT of your statement is whether you are talking about a body in a state of DIS-EASE or whether you are talking about a corpse….perhaps I am needlessly splitting hairs.
Claude, Would it be more appropriate to say that the NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of life within the LIVING body expressing less than 100% life but more than 0% life? Now I am really splitting hairs!
Joseph,
The body is either dead (having NO innate intelligence of the body) or alive (having innate intelligence of the body). There is NO in-between. Innate intelligence is always 100% (pri.22). What is being expressed by matter is innate force (pri.13) NOT intelligence. Innate force is an adapted universal force which is created by universal intelligence (pri.23). Therefore, we can reasonably deduce that the NTOSC is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the body. Notice that force is manifested by motion in matter; all matter has motion, therefore there is universal life in all matter. –
– Joseph, you are bringing up an interesting point by splitting hairs, and is the chiropractic meaning of life. Principle #2 states that it is the expression of this intelligence through matter. Therefore, we can reasonably deduce that it is universal life that is ALWAYS expressed through matter at different “levels”, (NOT life as we know it which is organic life only), meaning the intelligence of the atom, the intelligence of the molecule, the intelligence of the cell, the intelligence of the organ, the intelligence of the system, the innate intelligence of the body. –
– Also, the function of intelligence is ONLY to create FORCE, not matter (pri.8). The function of force is ONLY to unite intelligence and matter (pri.10). The function of matter is ONLY to express force (pri.13). And universal intelligence gives force to both organic and inorganic matter (pri.16). Here is my question to EVERYONE: –
– WHERE does matter come from and which chiropractic principle enunciates WHAT is it that has the function ONLY to create matter?
Claude, Claude, Claude, after I said just the other day we would not be getting into theological discussions, you ask a theological question.:) Nothing in the 33 chiropractic principles addresses the issue of the creation of matter.
Hey Joe,
Could we stop at “the NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of life”?
Definition of Instinct…the innate aspect of behavior that is unlearned, complex and normally adaptive. Does ii, have a complex understanding of adaptive responses to nature, to assure the contiuation of life?
Dr. Lessard,
Thanks for clarifying.
To answer your question, I think it is appropriate since the expression of intelligence through matter is the Chiropractic meaning of life. (Prin. 2).
I will say that Dr. Strauss has mentioned before on this blog that while the statements are true, he thinks there is a problem with making statements without the proper context.
I guess I see it as similar to my question about the appropriateness of stating “SUBLUXATIONS KILL”, without the context that it contributes to but is not the SOLE determining factor in the death of a person allows that subject to misinterpretation without further explanation.
My Question for us all:
Does ALL of what the NTOSChiropractor who chooses to explain the chiropractic objective to the public require context?
Other than one-to-one or group talks, I would assume advertising (unless in brochure format with a complete explanation) would be inefficient for the NTOSChiropractor.
Don,
The first requirement of any philosophical discussion is to define your terms. If we are speaking to others with the same vocabulary, context may not be an issue. But some chiropractors and most lay people do not (or not yet) have our vocabulary and so context is important. Just my thought.
I agree Dr. Strauss. As in the above example even the definition of life is subject to interpretation.
Question:
In your experience what would you say is the most misunderstood term that you would choose to define because they are essential to understanding chiropractic?
I dare say it will not be pain.. 😛
Don,
I think just by reading this thread we can see that the most misunderstood term that one could choose to define is life. With what has been said on this thread, I wonder if anyone reading this blog has any idea what we are talking about! Part of the problem is how the Palmers defined life. Principle # 1 is referring to existance. Actually so is #2 thru #16, so perhaps in discussing our objective as chiropractors we should not even be quoting the first 16 principle except where they are appropriate in discussing the existance of matter. What we relate to in chiropractic does not begin until #18 at the earliest. So even our use of the word “life” is confusing unless we understand it in the context that we are talking about (the expression of ii through matter, ie. living matter and not ui through non living matter.) Principle #4, The Triune of Life in the context of the 33 principles is not even referring to living organisms but all matter whether it expresses universal life (only existance) or innate life (manifesting one or more of the signs of life)…Prin. #18. We, perhaps need a new term to define univesal matter and what is represented by the first 16 principles and innate matter, that which is organized on a level that allows it to reorganize itself. There, that should clear everything up for everybody! Duh 🙂
Steve,
From the 33 principles, it is faulty reasoning to say that the NTOSChiropractor is one WHO chooses to LACVS for a full expression of life. A corpse has the chiropractic meaning of life within itself, so is dust in a coffin. That’s what it means to maintain matter in EXISTENCE. Principles #2 talks about the EXISTENCE of matter as being the meaning of life which is the expression of universal intelligence THROUGH matter. –
– So you see that even with or without subluxations the matter of the body is maintained in existence. Matter either exist or it does not. No in-between. LACVS does NOT give full expression of existence which is the chiropractic meaning of life as principle #2 was deduced from #1. –
– Deduced from principles 13, 29 and 31 we reasonably enunciate the objective of chiropractic as LACVS for a full EXPRESSION of the innate FORCES of the innate intelligence of the LIVING body. PERIOD.
Joseph,
That’s WHY I wanted to show people that none of the 33 deal with theology at all. 😉
Joseph, you remind me of “quick draw”! 😉
Dr. Strauss and others reading this,
I’m now in the process of developing a nontherapeutic chiropractic npm orientation but am not finding this easy. Coming from a therapeutic chiropractic frame of mind to this one is a difficult transition. My mind wants to start at explaining the vs and move directly into the benefits of getting them corrected (as if we can expect any beyond the full expression of innate forces of ii) and onto why.
I’m not even sure I would ever choose to get into Dr. Lessard’s example of the corpse having the chiropractic meaning of life (as true as that is 🙂
I can already predict Dr. Lessard writing that my program is going to be a reflection of WHO I choose to be. 😉
but could any of you please give me a sense of the key big concepts and timing that you have found to be efective in your nontherapeutic practices.
I’ll start.. as it is now I use an active listening approach.
1. quick anatomy of the spine and nerve system
2. what a vs is
3. why vs is silent and disastrous (messages from brain to body not 100%)
3. what can cause vs (EVERYTHING!! internal <external resist.force)
4. When to get them corrected (answer: immediately!)
5. For how long (answer:the rest of your life)
Thanks!
Sorry..time for all of this done on day 1 is about 10 – 15 minutes.
Don,
Your education program will be a reflection of WHO you choose to BE! 😉
Dr. Lessard,
I thought you’d say that…
Question: You mentioned that on day one you’d ask the npm whether they would like to live with vs or live without then wait for a response.
Is the next visit just as simple?
Don,
Last year I gave a talk to the GSCS to help their members create, as a group, a blueprint for a philosophical, practical and educational program for PMs. I remember to have created about 32 visit by visit encounters for their PMs in the 2 hour slot I was allotted. –
– I think that it was recorded on CD. Google GARDEN STATE CHIROPRACTIC SOCIETY and get in touch with the president and ask for a CD of the talk. –
– It’s the same “story” repeated over and over and over and over again, in as many different ways as possible, to create a PERPETUAL conversation with the PMs in a suitable philosophical environment. –
– As as matter of fact, a NTOSChiropractor, in the audience, had what I call an “Ah! Ha!” experience that transformed him. I know he reads this blog quite regularly. Perhaps he will share with the group, WHAT happened to him and HOW, as a result of my choosing WHO it was that I chose to BE at that speaking engagement.
– Yes! It is as simple as that! 😉
Thanks Dr. Lessard. I’ll give it a try.
Is there a title to the CD or do I ask for the CD created by you?
Don,
I did not create anything, the group did. The rest of it… I have no clue. 😉
Dr. Lessard, I sent them (GSCS) an email. Hope I hear something back.
I’ll let you know.
Dear Don, If you could let me know too, I’d greatly appreciate it! Best regards, MC
Dr. Castaneda,
Sorry, i forgot to get back to you.
The GSCS did not have a copy of it. Sorry again.