Innate Intelligence

3

When we are talking about the innate intelligence of the body I think we must be careful to use that term. Sometimes we even get so sloppy in our terminology we call it “innate”. The same goes for the innate intelligence of a cell, tissue or organ, amoeba. tree, etc.

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 3 comments

  1. David Suskin 01/12/2016, 12:06 pm:

    I agree and let me pose a question about the 33Ps and the arrival at the various principles.
    Very succinctly, we agree that we arrive at the a priori MP using the teleological Inductive observation that order and organization implicate Intelligence. P1
    Yet innate Intelligence, once again is based in the the Inductive observation that there exists living and non-living, And we Observe different levels (if you will), of organization, in this case, not only atomic, etc. (ui), but active and offering signs of life (observation).
    Yet no where WITHIN the MP is Organization implicated to derive into multiple levels.
    So the Chiropractic Philosophy is really a mixture of deductions And inductions (observations).
    Where do the limits of Induction begin and end? Could not we, now that we are using induction, Inductively implicate Mechanism, or any other Observation?
    If the 33Ps where truly a deductive paradigm, Only, then it would begin with an a priori beginning, and Only deduce principles, which I am stating it does not.
    Innate intelligence is another a priori point of departure thru our Inducing its existence thru observation, not intrinsic in the MP, P1

  2. David Suskin 01/12/2016, 4:07 pm:

    Maybe P1 should be written:
    1. The Major Premise – A Universal Intelligence is in all matter and continually gives to it all its properties and actions, thus maintaining it in existence and organized (or at various levels of organization or ) >> WRONG

  3. David Suskin 01/12/2016, 7:07 pm:

    P18 >> describes different type of motion (action from P1). That motion
    distinguishes non-living motion (atomic,etc.), and living (interrelated and adaptive), thus motion on different levels (Strauss- chiro philosophy p18). I guess that distinguishes a different organization, thus my initial question might resolve to Moot. Except for the fact that Observation is concurrent with the development of the principles, so logic is not the Only source of information, as it would be in a pure deductive analysis. Chiropractic Philosophy uses a deductive framework with inductive extrapolation and support at various principles (eg. design, non-life vs living, the use of observation, nervous system as conductive tissue to intelligence, subluxation as a physical/metaphysical event as observed by 3 components, and deducting the 4th (mental impulse), by implication of force can be interfered with and the event of LACVS, etc. etc.
    Since ii mission is active organization it would seem that the verbiage within the 33Ps, perhaps the MP could have organization within it’s definition. Organization suggests Intelligence and Intelligence suggests organization, but I guess it would suffice their only being a reference to the word “organization” ONLY at P21.
    Pardon my on-blog thinking process “aloud”

Leave a Reply

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