Natural Law


There are a number of approaches to natural law and it is helpful to understand each of them. They include:

Anti-teleological naturalism. This is the predominant view. It hold that natural functions are purely blind natural causes with no end purpose.

Methodological naturalism. This view holds that there may be more to life than just naturalism but we must act like there isn’t. This will prevent naturalism from veering into the supernatural or the occult. In other words, pretend that natural laws are all that exist.

Anti-supernatural naturalism (religious naturalism). This view holds that God is a process by natural principles (process theology). Deism is the practical application of this view.

Pragmatic naturalism. This post-modern view wants only to understand nature. It can accept Intelligent Design or even Christian theism. In my opinion, most chiropractors function with this mindset.

All of these approaches ignore, at best, or deny, at worst, the existence of a Creator of natural law. While chiropractors cannot identify a Creator without moving from the philosophical arena into the field of theology, we can embrace a metaphysical concept that is recognizable in the area of logic (deduction) and experience (empiricism) as we observe the world around us, and in so doing, we observe the manifestation of a principle that sustains it. We recognize that principle as the intelligence of the universe or its manifestation in living things, what we call the innate intelligence of the organism.

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 16 comments

  1. David Suskin 07/06/2015, 6:31 pm:

    Your analysis presents to me at least, a more comprehensive epistemological understanding of the context that chiropractic philosophy lies within.
    May I suggest within the context of my question (2 posts ago – David Suskin 07/04/2015, 1:24 pm), that within this post, when you state:
    ‘We recognize that principle as the intelligence of the universe or its manifestation in living things, what we call the innate intelligence of the organism.’
    that the manifestation of intelligence of the universe, manifested in living things deals ONLY with the maintaining of intelligently designed matter as Living (actively organized).
    Unless innate intelligence ALSO presents within the context of architecting the design and function of living matter (tissues, organs, systems, organisms) , as I make the observation of intelligence (as viewed empirically) of the interactions of these living systems, we call the ecosystem.
    A while back when I inquired about intelligent design, and the presence of intelligence as found within the creation of living things, Claude stated, I believe, that NO. Innate intelligence deals ONLY with p21 and p23 and that based on OUR MAJOR PREMISE, if I wanted to presume intelligence in the design of, or within nature, or within the ecosystem, etc. that I can do that, but THAT IS NOT CHIROPRACTIC.
    So once again, when you say “intelligence of the universe or its manifestation in living things”, we really are implying from what I can understand, something very specific to the effect of subluxation on a particular aspect of Life, that being coordination and harmony, as necessary to maintain life and the adaptation of those universal forces implicit in the design and function of living innate matter.
    The big idea of our Major Premise, is that our Universe is intelligent, and that EVERY LEVEL presents intelligence. Each level perhaps warranting a different aspect of that intelligence.
    When we see intelligence in inorganic matter, the atom, that is our base, UI. When we see intelligence in matter that has the signs of life, that is II, but II is specific to Living, Not creation or design of matter. When we see the intelligent interaction of these living systems (we call the ecosystem), that is NOT II. That might be an Interaction with II (each life affecting every other life).
    eg. We need food and O2 to sustain life. Food and O2 comes from plant life essentially, so OUR lives are dependent on our ecosystem to provide that substance of, the matter of Plant and Animals (previously alive via II).
    So It’s a complex, INTELLIGENT WEB.
    If Chiropractic Philosophy warrants or should encompass the full spectrum of what I understand “principle as the intelligence of the universe or its manifestation in living things” means, in it’s totality, then perhaps II needs to encompass a greater breath, or perhaps, cell intelligence, system, organ intelligence, species intelligence, ecosystem intelligence ALL encompass the enormity of the term
    Forgive my excess. Hope You Understand.

  2. David Suskin 08/01/2015, 6:53 pm:

    In a way I’m re-asking my preseeding question (which no one cared to reply to). I’ll keep this short. Maybe I’ll have a better shot.
    2 questions:
    1. Since all living things are “living” because of the existence of ii,
    And since nature exists as an interaction of all living things, acting as sources of food (assimilation) and substance (reproduction, growth),
    Can we conclude that our living, dynamic planet, what we call nature, which inductively shows the evidence of being highly organized and intelligent, IS ALL THE RESULT OF The ii that exists for the single purpose to create active organization of EACH, separate living organism?
    Nature exhibits the ii of each of its inhabitants and illustrates that thru Its evidence of being highly, complexly, interactively, organized and intelligent? Ii and ui supply the intelligence that is illustrated wholly, while truly affecting this existance at the atomic level (ui), and at the individual life level(ii)?
    2. Deism.
    What is the line of logic that illustrates that intelligence is not inherent OF the matter (deism), but iN the matter, yet separate (The Triune)?

    • Joe Strauss 08/02/2015, 5:25 pm:

      David, To answer your questions #1 I would say our philosophy says yes but it brings up the lyric of a song, “is that all there is?” Personally, I would say, no there is more but that leaves chiropractic philosophy and enters the field of theology.
      #2 The same method of perception ( by inductive reasoning) empiricism, that gives us our Major Premise. Sometimes, and this is one of them, empiricism is reality.

    • Claude 08/02/2015, 6:32 pm:


      1- Precisely! The innate LAW (ii) is the CAUSE of the effect that is called “Mother Nature”.,. which is anthropomorphism to its highest degree. First, the major premise is the start point of chiropractic. In other words universal intelligence is the law which is the CAUSE of maintaining e/matter in existence (pri1). Second, it is through the information of universal intelligence that the maintaining of
      of e/matter in existence occurs (pri.9). Third, it is the expression of this information of the law of organization (ui) by e/matter (pri13) that will manifest itself as motion in e/matter (pri14). Therefore, three steps also apply to the innate law. First, innate intelligence is the law that maintains the e/matter of a “living thing” in active organization (alive) (pri20-21). Second, it is through the information of innate intelligence that the maintaining of “living e/matter” ALIVE occurs (pri23). And third, it is the expression of this information of the law of ACTIVE organization (ii) by “living e/matter” that will manifest itself as harmonious motion in “living e/matter” (pri32). Therefore “nature” is the effect of the innate LAW. –

      – 2- When I have more time, I will address this question. 😉

      Carry on ADIO!

      • David Suskin 08/03/2015, 11:03 pm:

        2. Deism, New ageism, quantumism, universalism (mechanism at the living level) VERSUS
        THE TRIUNE?
        Sometimes I think that the major premise was actually determined thru the observation of living matter versus dead matter. That something was missing. Life force. That this entity that has left the living matter was extrapolated to an outside entity, to an intelligence that created it with purpose.
        This observation was then PRE extended to atomic structures.
        The triune was first observed within life. It was then determined to exist within the entity of the major premise.
        That’s why we call universal Life, such.
        The discovery occurred thru the giving of the adjustment, the questioning of what life was, is and back extrapolated to the major premise.

        • Claude Lessard 08/04/2015, 4:23 pm:


          If you UNDERSTAND that chiropractic is DISTINCT and SEPARATE from EVERYTHING ELSE and is INCLUSIVE of EVERY single bit of e/matter, you will also understand that deism is going beyond the major premise. Once again, the major premise is the START POINT of chiropractic! How the triune came to be “seen” and understood by DD, BJ, RWS, Reggie, Strauss was dependent on their individual ability to perceive it. So it is for you and me. 😉 –

          – Hopefully this blog helps, all of us to clarify and refine, our understanding of the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science.

          • David Suskin 08/04/2015, 4:54 pm:

            Maybe I’m using the wrong term, deism to refer to intelligence within the structures of nature, not outside of matter, as we view it.
            Intelligence, force, matter. NOT
            Matter containing, inherent with intelligence and force.
            It’s not so much that I don’t perceive it, I probably don’t 100% of the time, but as you see with my permutation of ii applied to Intelligence as found in Living Systems, nature, I have a fuller grasp.
            I just thought that there was a logical, not experiencial, explanation for Triune vs. Mono-une. 😉

          • Rich Story 08/05/2015, 1:43 am:

            The 33 principles are not science… they are purely chiropractic’s philosophical tenets. The major premise is chiropractic’s major premise and certainly not supported by science… theology maybe, but not science.

          • Joe Strauss 08/05/2015, 5:32 pm:

            Rich, you wrote “The 33 principles are not science… they are purely chiropractic’s philosophical tenets. The major premise is chiropractic’s major premise and certainly not supported by science… theology maybe, but not science.” I disagree. (def)A tenet is a principle or belief. (def)A principle is a general or fundamental law. It is a universally held belief AND a fundamental law demonstrated by everything that can be empirically demonstrated from the science of astronomy (the organization of the planets) to the science of microscopy (the organization of atoms) and everything in between. Principle #6-time is based on science, #11 is expressed as a physical (scientific law) #19 is demonstrated by the science of biology, #28 demonstrated by medical science. Do I need to state the scientific demonstration of all 33 chiropractic scientific principles which are also the world’s principles and “supported by science”? Perhaps it would be easier if you could tell me which principles are not based upon empirical facts demonstrated and supported by science.

          • David Suskin 12/22/2015, 2:48 pm:

            Yes, I’m returning to this. Conflicts Clarify so…
            Claude, Joe,
            The subject of deism. Joe, could you clarify your point (above).
            Claude, I don’t see this as a theological issue. It’s an issue that
            identifies The Triune (3 and separate), and A Diune(?)(Intelligence withing Matter). Yes, I know understand the argument that with Life, if Innate Intelligence was within, apart of Matter, that things would come back to life (That Argument), but UNIVERSAL INTELLIGENCE.
            And trust me, I’m not trying to play (devils advocate), etc. here.
            When I read, looking to embrace 100% or 90%, whatever, these philosophical concepts, as we discuss on COTB, or embrace ADIO,
            doubts, perhaps orientations do cause other educated thoughts to ask questions.
            It would seem to me, and I believe you Joe have discussed this, that in order to embrace Chiropractic, in most cases, one will have to embrace ADIO, which does encompass theological territories. It’s not intrinsic or part of The philosophy, but the philosophy does imply.
            Who is to say that ADIO creation did not establish laws, put them into effect and then LEFT THE SCENE?
            Who is to say that the behavior of II Must be the same as UI, in that The Triune applies to both?
            Yes Claude I know, just Adjust Spines and Be Happy, BUT, one has to bring those spines into ones office to do so, and a Congruent Chiropractor does make for a better advocate and recruiter.
            Sometimes I look for A Claude or A Joe Strauss to be The Authority, and that works for a while, but I realize, each man must process the philosophy and come up with what logically seems correct. I only ask for your help. And we are all Truth seekers aren’t we? And this is COTB which is suppose to challenge and stimulate thought, even though it might be the same old thought over and over.
            Obvious something doesn’t sit 100% right by me. So I look to enter the conflict once again, and sort it out.
            Anyway, I think I’ve brought up an old issue. Perhaps someone could shed some light on it, or just put some light out there to see a little better.
            Thank You

  3. David Suskin 08/02/2015, 6:06 pm:

    2. So the nature of observing intelligence as implicit in organization, plus as you’ve stated, cosmological, ontological and anthropological, places intelligence as cause (in not of, outside) of matters existence. Matter and it’s cause of it maintaining that existence is joined by as you’ve stated in your blue book CF, something precise and perfect, that being force, thus illuminating the existence of The Triune.
    1. Funny. I know so many ballads, but that one associated at least by google, to Peggy Lee? Never heard that one. Thanks Joe 🙂
    Knowing a little bit about you I can understand your answer to #1.
    But from a totally philosophical and logical point of view, you do see my line of reasoning behind the implications behind natures natural order as an occurance inferred from the existence of ii?
    Ii, whose wish it is is to allow innate matter to exist must know about the usage and availability of FOOD, ORGANIC FOOD and O2 in order to sustain life. Therefore it logically fits that ii knows all about and provides that which offers those materials, that being other life forms, animals and plants (O2), water, etc.
    it would seem that order, organization is not only evident at the atomic level, but at ALL levels. Atomic, subatomic, molecular, cellular, nature, and thru out all of existing matter, interactively, inorganic and organic.
    Reggie talks of nature and it’s intelligence all the time. He speaks of it as a component or evidence of the truth as demonstrated empirically in organisms and between organisms. So perhaps chiropractic philosophy does encompass, while briging into theological territory, the dynamics of man and life in natural intelligent interaction.
    Maybe parts of theology and all the studies we make distinctions between, all have components that act within intelligent and purposeful actions and designs?
    Maybe all concepts have parts that are interrelated and parts that are separate, those separating and distinctive parts falling under the heading of essense.
    Essense is a difficult if not impossible thing to know. Sometimes it isn’t.

  4. Claude Lessard 08/05/2015, 4:16 pm:


    Do you UNDERSTAND that chiropractic is DISTINCT and SEPARATE from EVERYTHING ELSE and is INCLUSIVE of EVERY single bit of e/matter?

    • Rich Story 08/06/2015, 12:09 pm:

      Like I said, Claude… That is a chiropractic philosophical tenet. Doesn’t make it science or reality.

      • Claude Lessard 08/07/2015, 7:29 pm:


        I got what you posted and I accept your choice as to WHO you choose to be in relation to the thirty three principles. In the past several years, this blog has inquired into the nature of basic science and applied science. We also inquired whether or not basic science and applied science exist within chiropractic. You might enjoy reading them. I am in the process of writing a book about it. Meanwhile, I want to get whatever you wish to post on this blog. I welcome and value your input.

  5. Rich Story 08/06/2015, 12:29 pm:

    Joe… The forces which make up and keep matter together have and continue to be researched and tested. Some of the particle research is amazing and mind boggling. But none of it supports chiropractic’s major premise of intelligence as what creates those forces. The reasearch does support that the universe is random, but man’s mind and beliefs don’t like that view. The 33 principles pretty much unravel when you look at them from that angle. Some things that stand out are; how does a destructive force, as universal intelligence is described, change its character and become a constructive force and maintain matter? Another is the mental impulse… seems it can’t be identified or demonstrated let alone change from an innate force to a universal force. The principles are nicely packaged , but outdated, antiquated philosophical view of the universe and what is animating it.

    • Joe Strauss 08/07/2015, 3:05 pm:

      Rich,A tornado is a destructive universal force (the wind knocks down buildings). That same wind can be adapted by use of a windmill and “create” electricity but it takes intelligence (in this case educated intelligence) to build windmills. That electricity can then run an electrical appliance but it tends to be destructive toward structural matter, (principle number 11) and can cause electrocution. You, as well as we all do, begin with a metaphysical presumptive world and life viewpoint. In your case; that the world is random, self existent, without purpose and chaotic I begin with a totally opposite one. We both can demonstrate/cite research,theories, beliefs authorities and premises to support our position. In the end your position leads to a purposeless existence to satisfy temporary desires. There is no reason to even be a chiropractor except maybe to make enough money to be comfortable or entertain oneself until you die and to avoid the ultimate questions in life: who am I, why am I here, and where am I going? I’m not sure that such totally differing world and life viewpoints can accommodate intelligent discussion-any more than a biblical creationist can have a meaningful discussion with a Darwinian evolutionist. As one famous evolutionist once said, the creationist must check his brain at the church door. Creationists are not willing to do that and believe that their Authority makes more sense than Charles Darwin.

Leave a Reply

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