A Thought (that I may have posted before)

12

Matter that acts in a manner inconsistent with the matter around it necessitates another law acting upon it rather than, or taking precedence over  the universal law, much the same as the law of aerodynamics under certain circumstances supercedes the law of gravity. Matter existing in the universe should be naturally broken down into its simplest components. If it does not and in fact goes in the other direction, becoming more complex,  we say there is another principle brought into action (active organization). We call that principle innate intelligence.

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 12 comments

  1. Steve 07/16/2014, 7:04 pm:

    Yes Joe, twice before, but this is the best rendition yet !
    This may speak well to David’s question about the deductive process. A different principle deserves a different name. To differentiate what is , was, and always will be, (Universal matter) and what is transient (Innate matter), yet show commonality (intelligence driven), two principles were created/recognized.
    “What is that which is present in the living body and absent in the dead?
    It is not inherent; it is not in any of the organs which are essential to life.
    An intelligent force which I saw fit to name Innate, usually known as
    Spirit, creates and continues life when vital organs are in a condition to be
    acted upon by it. That intelligent life-force uses the material of the
    universe just in proportion as it is in a condition to be utilized”. DD, 1910

    • David Suskin 07/16/2014, 7:36 pm:

      Joe and Steve,
      Thanks Steve for seeking out this posting. It’s another one of Joe’s insightful solutions.
      As quoted from …much the same as the law of aerodynamics under certain circumstances supercedes the law of gravity…
      and …and in fact goes in the other direction, becoming more complex, we say there is another principle brought into action (active organization). We call that principle innate intelligence…

      thus the deduction…
      Joe? Claude? Steve?
      A few things to think of here…hmmmm

      Deductions…..hmmmm
      I would love something that said
      blah blah blah and thus innate forces, THE MENTAL IMPULSE MUST USE THE NERVOUS SYSTEM TO TRANSMIT… I’m not going to start that one again, for now. I have it pretty well grasped (in the heart).
      BUT?

      again Steve, thanx for finding this one and of course Joe, YOU PUT THE COOKIES ON THE BOTTOM SHELF. Sometimes 🙂

  2. Steve 07/18/2014, 5:11 pm:

    For David
    “The P. S. C. explains that Innate is in each being, next to which is the
    brain, this makes impulse, which passes through nerves and makes
    mechanical action, this movement is function. This stage is where man,
    with function, substance, or electricity, that is conveyed through pipes or
    wires makes action of machinery; it expresses the purpose of the machine.
    You have reached at fundamental, the basis of everything. From that can
    be elaborated all that Man’s function has or may create. It is giving to man
    a unity that never existed before the advent of Chiropractic. No man ever
    linked the brain with the physical through a direct nerve system…1910
    All function within the body being
    controlled from within the body by the nerve system. He locates and releases
    impingement of nerves or spinal cord, to restore functional control. The
    results are looked upon as good. vol 22
    Yet, some people wonder why the Chiropractor emphasizes mind and
    mental energy circuits between brain and body and why we vitalize im-portance
    of the nervous system as they affect every part of that body. Every
    cell of the body is hooked up with the brain, and every nerve leaving the
    brain to connect with some part of the body must pass through an opening in
    the base of the skull to go down through and form the spinal cord before they
    branch out to all organs and parts of that body. vol 22
    Without this control
    which the nerve system carries on, there could not be life. An
    interference with this nerve force, which is the source of life, will
    deplete life in direct ratio to the interference. vol 18

    • David Suskin 07/18/2014, 6:02 pm:

      HI Steve,
      This is DD, correct?
      I have, as some would say without condemnation, problems with this in that,
      1. mechanical action, this movement is function. >> this is mechanistic and We’ve grown past that premise
      2. it expresses the purpose of the machine >> I like this (Purpose), but still
      3. No man ever
      linked the brain with the physical through a direct nerve system – I assume this is a link between the spiritual and the physical – but again I’m assuming so it’s not said here and again, doesn’t deduce i
      4.All function within the body being
      controlled from within the body by the nerve system. He locates and releases
      impingement of nerves or spinal cord, to restore functional control.
      SAYS WHO, >> I understand more of the hierarchy of ui, or a new process (life is constructive), therefore a requires a new principle >> but still >> Why the Nervous System – assumed? Yes I know it’s 1910!
      5.Every
      cell of the body is hooked up with the brain >> I’ve made this point of contention and Claude SLAMMED ME. 🙂 I understand it more as a communication from ii to organ ii to tissue ii to cell ii, but not a direct link from nerve to EVERY cell yes/no
      6. nerve system carries on, there could not be life. >> well that seems to be a fact >> Although people are kept alive without a completely functioning nerve system. Their tissues and cells aren’t doin so well. They’re hooked up to all kind of machines! but the heart is beating, O2 is coming in and CO2 is going out. There is cellular metabolism. Not the life I would want! but Alive? maybe? yes/no

      So – I’m not in disagreement that the inference has been made about the nervous system, at some point in Chiropractic history, just WHY IT WAS LOOKED AT as the conveyor of The Mental Impulse (II>>Innate Forces) – and as part of a deductive 33 principled philosophy which where where p28 comes out of all the ones that precede it?

      • Steve 07/18/2014, 6:58 pm:

        David,
        The first quote, I believe, is DD quoting BJ. The rest are in books written by BJ. Only Claude would say “without condemnation”, the rest of us assume this freedom. 😉
        1. much of the activity controlled by the nerve system is mechanical, chewing, walking, etc.
        2. later in the Green Books the term machine is recanted as a reference to the body because it is so much more.
        3. This statement was in lieu of BJ’s disdain for the term sympathetic nerve system. ( which he claimed did not exist due to the commonly accepted definitions of sympathy..reflex action, {“B. J. Palmer, in one of his addresses to his class in Portland this
        summer, aptly quoted, ‘that he who tears down must rebuild greater,’
        and said, ‘when I saw there was no use for a Sympathetic Nervous
        System, I threw it out, and then just had to put something better in its
        place, so I discovered Direct Mental Impulse.’”})
        4. says who…every anatomy/physiology book in the modern world.
        5. please remember all learning comes in stages.SOTC innate intelligence (system, organ, tissue and cell) had not been considered in BJ’s time, and may be exclusive to OC.
        6. to be kept functioning is not the same as being alive, remember the frog’s leg experiment, just because it jumps does not make it alive.
        I hope this helps.

        • David Suskin 07/18/2014, 7:22 pm:

          Steve,
          It helps >> function vs Alive, yes, but the whole body (minus the fluids-yet fluids part of living structure), IS ALIVE.
          The physiology books seem to render a GREATER CONTROL OVER BODY SYSTEMS, via the endocrine system, being chemical and cyclic amp bound, plus tons more of info, etc. Yes I intuitively grasp the nervous system, as a Living System, Intuitively see it as a source of Mental Impulse, BUT THAT THE MENTAL IMPULSE – The communication package of ii, uses the nervous system >> OK I can assume that, even more now, with inductive science showing it’s interaction with the immunological systems, etc. I understand, as best as possible, for now, the MENTAL IMPULSE, but I still
          within 33 Principles cannot find, by deduction, the pathway from the major premise to the nervous system. Yes I believe it. Yes I even induce it. Yes I Let it be for now. Yes I see FORCE, INNATE FORCE, as needing THE force conductor of the body and that is either the nervous system and/or ATP(chemistry), but there is no immediate coordinating, organizing flow to ATP except via circulation, SLOW- to slow (assumption) for adaptation…. I go round in circles on this, sometimes, forgetting what my original correct line of thought is, or was. All gets confusing. SO YES, It helps, but if there is any line of logic in what I’m saying >> SAY SO. or illogic –
          I’M LOOKING FOR PRINCIPLE 28 to be a clear deduction. Maybe I don’t know what deduction truly means? or is? or how it functions to 100% bear truth if the initial premise is True or assumed to be True.
          Anyway, I welcome further discussion. and if not… I’m on my own

          • Steve 07/18/2014, 9:45 pm:

            “Deduction—Act or process of deducing; mediate inference in which the
            conclusion follows necessarily from a full understanding of given data or
            propositions;—contrasted with induction. (Webster). vol 27
            19 + 20 + 21 + 23 = 28. Prin. 28 recognizes the supremacy and function of the nerve system, nothing more. It is as we say a deduction.

      • Don 07/18/2014, 9:57 pm:

        After Steve’s last post, I am now wondering if the lexicon posted above should include terms (e.g. deduction) that are defined elsewhere (e.g. Websters).
        Just a thought.

        • Joe Strauss 07/19/2014, 2:10 am:

          Good suggestion Don. Any others beside deduction?

      • Don 07/21/2014, 8:40 pm:

        Thanks Joe.
        I would also suggest
        Induction (inductive logic)
        Science
        Medicine

        One other that I often see used interchangeably….
        Nervous system and Nerve system.
        I am not sure if they are both correct but someone once said it is improper to us the term nervous system because a system cannot be nervous. lol.
        All kidding aside, nervous system seems to be the most accepted.
        And that is what the lexicon is for me, a resource that clearly lays out the language, their terms and use notwithstanding common everyday accepted definitions or generally accepted definitions (e.g. Websters).
        Thanks.

  3. David Suskin 07/18/2014, 9:57 pm:

    OK, yes Steve, and you mentioned the words
    “recognizes the supremacy and function of the nerve system”

    Is that True>>meaing because we have deduced that and ii is required for LIFE, and innate forces are required to join matter for LIFE, that this SUPREME SYSTEM, which i don’t know if that’s been declared, when ever, (I might be wrong). That this supreme system IS THE SYSTEM OF CHOICE FOR II TO PERFORM IS MISSION AND FUNCTION

  4. Steve 07/21/2014, 5:07 pm:

    Yes David, I guess when you invent a concept like innate intelligence, you get to define it any way you wish. Remember DD was a magnetic healer and began working with the end organ. He used logic and what we would today call, reverse engineering.

    He said,”Life is the expression of tone. In that sentence is the basic principle of Chiropractic. Tone is the normal degree of nerve tension.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *