One of the problem with the nonlinear model of quantum mechanics, as I see it, is that there appears to be no absolutes, no laws. We must establish laws or standards, at least in certain areas. This is the dilemma of a free society, the right of free speech but not to yell fire in a crowded theater. Certain models of chiropractic say there are no absolutes or standards. The interactive open system concept says everything affects everything. While that is true in order to function in a society, we do need standards or laws. We have learned that the Law of Gravity says that an object falls to the ground at a speed relative to the masses of attracting bodies not at 9.8m/sec 2. On the moon it is different. But for the sake of discussion we accept 9.8m/sec2 as a law, that the speed is uniform for all objects on earth because the difference in the relative size of the earth and all objects is for all practical purposes, immeasurable . This non-standard philosophy is accepted by straights who do not want to impose standards on the body but allow the innate intelligence to do it. However, there are absolutes, for every person for every bodily function. They may change constantly and for that reason, we just do not know them. The medical mechanic says there is one and we know it. The quantum mechanic says there is not one, everything is relative, no absolutes. The straight chiropractor says there is one, just because we cannot educatedly determine it for another person’s body or our own does not mean it does not exist. There are absolutes and standards that society and our profession can and should determine, black, white, right and wrong, chiropractic and something else. We can and must determine whether a practice is chiropractic or something else.
another thoughtful well-written post Joe.
(at least by our standards…)
thank you.
Thank you Todd
Joseph,
Our standards are the science of the 33 chiropractic principles from which stems the chiropractic objective.
… in other words, we have standards to “determine whether a practice is chiropractic or something else” as you posted. WHY is it that chiropractors do NOT use those standards of the 33 principles in practice and keep only them within the covers of books?
Two (2) Questions Claude:
1. How do we maintain that the 33 principle are science? I can understand them as deductions and reason but can you explain how they can be viewed as science?
2.Do the 33 principles give rise to our objective or does the objective give us our 33 principles? Exactly how are the 33 principles and the objective related?
Joseph,
Even though we have dealt with this question in past blogs, let us, together without condemnation, inquire into the science of the 33 chiropractic principles. –
– Pure science, also called basic science, is the exact science of the DEVELOPMENT of scientific theories. According to Roche Applied Science, “the research of these theories is done at times without consideration of their application, and at other times aims to answer phenomena and possible mechanisms proposed in applied science. Pure science is sometimes used to refer specifically to physics and pure mathematics, but chemistry and biology may also be considered as examples”. –
– Is your educated process of accepting that 1+1=2… the same educated process that you use to accept the major premise?
Joseph,
To answer your question #2, it is the chiropractic objective that is deduced from the 33 principles. To answer your question: ” Exactly how are the 33 principles and the objective related? –
– From principles 28, 29 and 31 we deduce WHAT and HOW chiropractic does what it does… which is to “LACVS”. From principles 13, 20, 23, 29 and 31 we deduce WHY chiropractic does WHAT it does… which is “for a full (pri.29) expression (pri.13) of the innate FORCES (pri.23) of the innate intelligence of the living (pri.20) vertebrate (pri.31) body (pri.13, 28). PERIOD!
Wasn’t the object of DD Palmer adjustment to remove a subluxation and thereby restore ease? Admittedly, though the 33 principles existed prior to being codified by BJ et al. , the objective seems to have preceded it’s own full explanation.
I am curious as to the reason LACVS is not mentioned in the list of principles. It would be the final deduction, would it not?
Not only is the objective deduced from the 33Ps it is also verification for and application of them.
Steve,
You mentioned: “I am curious as to the reason LACVS is not mentioned in the list of principles.” What do YOU think the reason is?
Steve,
Your curiosity is extremely relevant here and is worth inquiring, together without condemnation, into the nature of LACVS as it relates to the science of the 33 chiropractic principles.
You mentioned: “I am curious as to the reason LACVS is not mentioned in the list of principles.” What do YOU think the reason is?
I can only guess that it is a conclusion therefore not technically a principle.
Steve,
Thank you! That is precisely what it is!!!! –
– From the science of the 33 principles, we can, with rational logic, deduce the chiropractic objective as I demonstrated above. The chiropractic objective is a conclusion based on science of the 33 chiropractic principles through flawless deductive reasoning which makes it a true conclusion… thereby Chiropractic’s true objective. The science of the 33 chiropractic principles can be applied to ALL living vertebrate bodies in the entire universe, can ALWAYS be duplicatable ALL of time and is INCLUSIVE of EVERYONE regardless of creed, race, culture, politics, governments or financial ability to pay! 🙂