A Right Thing Done in a Wrong Way is (fill in the blank)?

12

I would maintain that the correct answer is “Wrong”. A right thing should be done at the right time, in the right manner, and for the right reason. Unfortunately too many have bought into Joseph Fletcher’s Situation Ethics philosophy that the end justifies the means. Telling certain stories in the media which are untrue to attempt to raise consciousness often appears in the media. Recent examples include: untrue rape stories of college fraternities, or of a black man raising his hands to the police and being shot, or the Pope announcing that puppies will be in heaven, are examples of what someone thinks is the right thing justifying it done in a wrong (dishonest) way.
The greatest chiropractic example of the truth of this principle is in the transmission of the mental impulse. Vertebral subluxation interferes with this transmission. Some have incorrectly suggested that it is a damming up of the mental impulse as if it was analogous to a flow of water and that we remove “the rock from the hose”. I think it is more like a message that is not getting through at the exactly correct moment. If an email does not reach me at the intended moment it can be worthless or be harmful. It definitely does not fulfill its intended purpose. In the case of the mental impulse it is harmful in that it is now acting as a universal force and definitely not allowing for “harmonious action of all the parts of an organism…”, to occur. A mental impulse is either perfect or it is a universal force. Since universal forces tend to be destructive toward structural matter it may result in the death of the cell. At best (and that is questionable) the cell’s innate intelligence will adapt that universal force but only for the benefit of that cell, not for the benefit of the organism. A cell functioning for self is still alive but not as part of the body but apart from the body like a cancer cell or a bacteria. We could call that positional death from the standpoint of the cell and partial death from the standpoint of the body. BJ referred to this state as DIS- EASE. Unfortunately it has been confused with the medical term disease or mistakenly seen as the cause of disease.
Which is better, I correct the cause of XYZ disease or I correct the cause of partial death restoring a more complete expression of life?

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 12 comments

  1. David Suskin 12/30/2014, 3:51 am:

    Actually it’s p1.
    Actions and properties governed by intelligence, joined by force, which determines existence of matter in organizations that define and predict truth.
    You are making references to functions and attributes that define objects and their purpose. Who would know that the Object oriented computer languages (eg. c++), that I studied, where constructs are built that mimic universal designs, encompassing
    Encapsulation
    Inheritance
    Polymorphism
    As revealed in instanciated objects.
    It’s also basic Boolean logic
    Statement (pos and neg)= NEGATIVE
    Statement (neg and pos)= NEGATIVE
    Universal intelligence, which is perfect can only yield a positive ADIO outcome. Anything else is the darkness of OIBU (LOM permitting by choice that journey)
    Paradoxically, it takes an educated and truth seeking mind to know where to put the period, and get out of the car and let go of the pointers and stay centered in the forest, listening, not judging, and doing what is right and not necessarily expedient, lovingly.

  2. David Suskin 12/30/2014, 11:44 am:

    re:Positional death
    That’s a new one Joe, it would appear.
    It kinda completes the concept. Thumbs up

    • glenn allen 12/30/2014, 7:33 pm:

      If you want a simple answer to a simple question, something that is so rare to this group, A Right Thing Done in a Wrong Way Is…….still a right thing. The way might be wrong, but the thing is no less right.

      • David Suskin 12/30/2014, 8:19 pm:

        But you might end up jail.
        (Abridged version)
        Must’ve been the right time must’ve been the wrong place.
        Must’ve been the right place must’ve been the wrong rhyme…
        -dr john suggested this quintessential foul up.
        Can we come to agreement what is right and what is wrong?
        If so then your right done wrong is the same as your wrong done right. The outcome? WRONG!

      • Joe Strauss 12/30/2014, 10:04 pm:

        Glenn, a right thing is always the right thing, you are correct but the question involved the objective and the means, manner and timing.
        1. Executing murderers is the right thing. Lynch mobs and vigilantism are the wrong way of going about it.
        2. Removing interference to the expression of innate forces is always a right thing. Doing that apart from correcting vertebral subluxations(as a certain technique teaches) and calling it chiropractic is wrong.
        3. Getting sick people well is a legitimate service and in that sense, a right thing. Calling it something other than the practice of medicine has caused much animosity toward chiropractic by the medical profession and confusion on the part of the public and in that sense, is wrong.
        4. Having a profession based upon a philosophy and then defining the profession by one man’s opinion even if and when it is inconsistent with that philosophy is wrong.
        Perhaps I worded the question poorly.

        • David Suskin 12/31/2014, 3:44 am:

          Joe,
          In the cases you stated, when the intent is of ill nature or to mislead oneself or another, I would agree. Yet Serendipity might have a cousin in your statement, where something right is done for the wrong reason.
          Wasn’t chiropractic born that way, as a cure for deafness, and look what truths came from the clarification of those initial concepts!
          I think ‘Post Its’, a mild glue, semi stick posting note substance, was born with the attempt to create a super glue by 3m. Something right was attempted in the wrong way produced a wrong result for one scenario but a very right result for another. Made billions, yes lots of messy computer monitors and desks, but a very successful result in the end.
          Thus lemonade is made from lemons, and discoveries are made.
          Good intent in the end, can produce sound, and new beneficial objectives eventually. Without to much damage.
          Poor intent generally creates the schisms and conflicts that your initial statement suggests. And lots of damage.
          It probably all boils down to semantics and as you correctly stated, the primary objective.

          • Joe Strauss 12/31/2014, 3:07 pm:

            David, doesn’t principal number 17, negate the possibility of “serendipity”? Tradition tells us that when the law of gravity caused the breaking of the bottom of Mr. Naismith’s peach basket, the game of basketball was improved. Before that happened many good peach baskets were ruined, to the dismay of peach pickers. Since there are more basketball fans than peach pickers that improvement is considered positive, just as post it notes, while not replacing/improving upon superglue are an improvement over paper and scotch tape (also made by 3M). They, 3M, changed their objective.
            In the case of chiropractic, while the result of it “getting sick people well” has positively affected millions of people since 1895, objective chiropractic maintains that millions more could and would have been positively affected if the true objective of chiropractic had been established and practiced since that time. Further complicating the issue for objective chiropractors and humanity is the confusion that getting sick people well has created and perpetuated since 1895. I think the ultimate issue is positive versus negative survival values. The “cumulative positive survival values” of Post-it notes seem to be an improvement over paper and scotch tape, but not superglue. Those who continue to embrace traditional chiropractic think that the positive survival value of “getting sick people well” despite the fact that it embraces the medical objective and is being absorbed by and confused with it, is better than “improving the expression of innate forces”. Time and history will demonstrate which group is correct.

        • glenn allen 01/01/2015, 5:54 pm:

          Joe, thank you for responding to my post. You know me well enough to know that I see things in their simple and basic forms. The question seemed simple enough, and as has been the case all along, it drew long, drawn out responses, some that made sense, and some just plain silly. The ones that were silly will of course react in kind. I have so far completely agreed with you on most things, and hope that I will always feel that I can be open with you if and when I do not, without feeling the need to put up any defenses. I have always valued your knowledge and see no reason to stop now.

  3. David Suskin 12/31/2014, 4:10 pm:

    Joe,
    Agreed, and clarified.
    I would say that the Statement (question) of this post
    ‘A Right Thing Done in a Wrong Way is???’, when you hold this Statement to p17, like you have done with the definition of ‘Serendipity’, cause and effect would also negate the possibility of this post.
    Outcome of p17 is always just that, The result (no-judgement). So now we get the realm (rules?) of semantics. In the Spirit of what you mean with Your Post, and agreeing with you, and understanding what you Mean, and applying that standard to Serendipity, I would suggest that it borders on meaning the close, if not exactly the same thing. Intent and Time and history do demonstrate the level(s) of positive versus negative survival values, in the end. yes/no?
    There really is no value judgement to p17, or is there?

    • Joe Strauss 12/31/2014, 8:36 pm:

      Other than the first 3 words, I haven’t the slightest idea what you are talking about, David

      • Joe Strauss 01/01/2015, 2:08 pm:

        David, thank you for your participation and contribution to this blog. A very happy and productive new year for you and your family. Joe

  4. David Suskin 12/31/2014, 9:49 pm:

    Joe,
    Sorry about that. There are some typos and I need to be more sentence structure oriented versus presenting a running train of thought, amongst other writing inadequacies.
    I do apologize.
    Anyway, more importantly
    Happy New Year to you and your family. I look forward to reading your new book, if it comes out this coming year.
    Thank you for making this Blog available. It has allowed me to learn a great deal.
    2015 offers great opportunities for us all. I hope to make use of them.
    And again, Thank You for your dedication.

Leave a Reply

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