Reality

15

My reality is:
1. How I am, not how I feel.
2. What the referee(s) sees not what my limited camera angle visualizes.
3. Who God says He is, not how I (in my limited knowledge/understanding) perceive Him.
4. The Law of Life, not the medical model.
5. The Mental Impulse, not empirical perception.
6. Laws/principles, not theories.

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 15 comments

  1. Matthew Alvord 02/06/2017, 2:25 pm:

    Innate vs Educated

  2. David Suskin 02/07/2017, 2:57 pm:

    When you say “My reality is:” aren’t you really invoking how YOU see it, or think it, which is exclaiming a Subjective position, which is inevitably is the invoking of “What FEELS right to you, based on your thinking? (thought >> feelings >> reality of viewpoint)
    Therefore shouldn’t the statement, as one of Objectivity be:
    OUR REALITY, or THE REALITY, or REALITY IS: …

    • Joe Strauss 02/09/2017, 10:58 am:

      Reality however is based on true facts, authority. I may be convinced/feel that the runner did not step out of bounds but if the referee says he did…that’s what counts. Reality is objectivity, not subjectivity. The ref may be truly wrong (and they have been) but you do not have a game without them. you have chaos, anarchy. That’s the condition of our profession in 2017. We do not have the “referee” of the 33 principles defining and controlling the profession. The CCE just “plays” by what “feels right to” them today and will change tomorrow. You cannot make up the rules as you go along.

  3. David Suskin 02/07/2017, 3:42 pm:

    and if you insist on “My reality is:”, I’ll step on your foot while you say it, and then you can once again say “My reality is 1. How I am, not how I feel.” – OUCH

    • Joe Strauss 02/09/2017, 11:04 am:

      David, the pain will go away shortly and my feelings will change…OR… an x-ray will demonstrate that you broke my toe and that is my objective reality.

  4. David Suskin 02/09/2017, 12:40 pm:

    Where is the objectivity with regards to the immaterial? I know, valid logic (deduction) or faith.
    Or if the pain doesn’t go away and there is no X-ray or objectivity
    e.g. THIS ELECTION, DEMOCRATS, MSM?
    Did I inflame any feelings? I know.
    Law and order. Constitution. The Authority.
    or Anarchy prevails.
    And if faith is nill?
    BUT I AGREE JOE. OR WANT TO AGREE.
    MY reality consists of a hotbed of emotion etched by the vicissitudes of
    Day to day x >60 years plus objective reality.
    My Bad.

    • Claude Lessard 02/09/2017, 2:20 pm:

      Once the UNIVERSAL major premise is appropriated by chiropractic and the 32 subsequent principles are deduced through rational logic, it is up to the chiropractor WHO choose to accept them, to investigate in depth their validity or invalidity, and “see” if their concluded chiropractic objective is true. If it is a true conclusion (and it is), then it is the chiropractor WHO is free to choose to practice the chiropractic objective by abiding within the AUTHORITY of the 33 principle of chiropractic’s basic science. At that very moment you have define your reality as an objective chiropractor. Amazing isn’t it? 😉

  5. David Suskin 02/10/2017, 1:03 am:

    Maybe I’m more inclined to apply these highlighted points to the Chiropractic Objective as applied to a patient (practice member) —
    Patient’s Reality as adjustments are offered by a Chiropractor to fulfill the Chiropractic Objective of LACVS:
    1. How the patient IS, not how they feel.
    2. What the referee(s) sees not what the patient’s limited camera angle visualizes.
    3. Who God says He is, not how The Patient (in their limited knowledge/understanding) perceives Him.
    4. The Law of Life, not the medical model. (Chiropractic not PT)
    5. The Mental Impulse, not empirical perception. (What is effected by spinal adjustment – LACVS Period, not musculoskeletal symptomatic Treatments)
    6. Laws/principles, not theories. (Application of adio not oibu)

    • Claude 02/10/2017, 2:51 pm:

      When I am in the office, I am somehow “shared” and participating in facilitating the correction of vertebral subluxations by the innate intelligence of the body of the practice member. “This is a BIG THING” to that person. Multiply it by thousands and please, please… begin to “see” that I am NOT doing it; participation in this something LARGER is just that… participation. It is the trend of my educated intelligence to want to take control and full credit for the adjustment. It is me WHO choose to let go of this temptation and choose to be honored and humbled that I am somehow “shared” and participating in something LARGER. I am not doing it; it is being done with me, through me, and as me! Paradoxically, this pure reality is usually described as the “impossible dream” because, in a sense, I am not at home here at all, and I am surely not in control. So you see why we fight it. –

      – In other words, “Find it, adjust it, and leave it alone”. The ONLY control WE have is OUR educated intelligence. It is we WHO are invited to choose to use it well by being humble.

      • David Suskin 02/10/2017, 8:03 pm:

        Well said, expressed, illuminated, defined.
        BJ’s (JParker) – innate to innate, by analogy not by actuality.
        Really educated intelligence. In the groove, in the pocket, flow, intuition, creative story telling over and over, on purpose, positive intent, etc.
        You say “I am not at home here at all, and I am surely not in control.” –
        I find this place stressful, in the sense having to get over a hump or thru a portal or door. Maybe it’s having to speak up or confront, getting creative, etc. Once you’re in, you’re in, but the “not at home and not in control”; I sometimes get broadsided by a patients complaint or symptom or they not getting it, or an exchange of money for a service I’m trying to deliver but they don’t really understand, again.
        Disconcerting it is.
        Anyway thank you Claude for reaching deep.
        I like when you assist my learning process.
        Thanks 🙂

        • Claude Lessard 02/11/2017, 3:50 pm:

          David,

          When you posted: “I find this place stressful, in the sense having to get over a hump or thru a portal or door” — are you not attacking, hating, or condemning this REALITY of yours? Is it not your educated intelligence trying to have the last word, trying to “win”? Could it not be that you do not recognize your “I sometimes get broadsided…” to be thoughts and feelings, provided by your educated intelligence, that YOU choose? If it is you WHO choose to choose them, WHY attacking, hating or condemning the thoughts and feelings that you chose? Or are you not, perhaps, identifying yourself with your educated intelligence? Don’t you see that you are FREE to choose to drop those thoughts and feelings that you chose at the first place? As I mentioned in my previous post: “The ONLY control WE have is OUR educated intelligence. It is we WHO are invited to choose to use it well by being humble. 😉

  6. David Suskin 02/11/2017, 5:10 pm:

    Are you saying that Everyone identifies with or using their Educated Intelligence and I am not realizing this? Or is their a different realm to Idenitify with?
    Or we all do and I realize it that the only way to manage it is either by choice or if acting as a REACTIVE not controlled which is my and many situations particularly when there are emotional components, TO BE HUMBLE.
    It’s the reactive nature of Educated intelligence that overrides CONTROL that poses the problem of Successfully navigating thru career (chiropractic) or day to day living?

  7. Claude Lessard 02/12/2017, 3:21 pm:

    Your educated brain is a part of you to be used, BY YOU, like other parts of your body. It has a certain capacity of functioning that is called your educated intelligence. The activity of your educated brain is called your educated mind. My question is: WHY giving AUTHORITY to your educated intelligence, giving it free rein, so to speak, so it can “CONTROL” your choices and thus taking away your FREEDOM to choose, your freewill? Does that makes sense to you?

  8. David Suskin 02/12/2017, 4:20 pm:

    I have an answer. Perhaps it warrants privacy by email, as to not waste this posts purpose. Joe S has my email. Perhaps he can reference it to you and communicate with me. I’d like to tell you my brief but conflicted
    Story as it pertains. But I understand if not let’s say desired you’ve been more than helpful.
    QUESTION:
    Is FREEDOM to choose. Free will, part of educated intelligence (brain)?
    I’d say yes, which poses it’s existential nature, paradox. Freewill, the ability to choose is part of the mechanics, the paradox of the chooser.
    How to control the controller.
    Truly freeing oneself in the face of issues, emotions, subconscious stops, perceived realities, emotional locks.
    Even the the harsh realities of $$$ effecting ones utilizing their Freedoms effectively.
    YES, it makes sense.
    FREEDOM? I am freer than I realize. I do not truly know how to honor myself enough, to be Free enough to be happy, appreciative, in my heart so I maintain the blessing of life in my consciousness to be cool, filled with self esteem. I feel so f__ked sometimes. Pardon my French?? 😉

    • Joe Strauss 02/13/2017, 4:19 pm:

      Free will is part of the educated brain (chiropractic Philosophy). However it is also a theological construct. BJ did not recognize/understand/ acknowledge theological constructs so he only placed it in chiro. Philos. Terms. A pig (although considered the smartest of animals has no educated brain.How do they know that Pig IQ?) Momma pig never said “don’t get your clean outfit/hide dirty. The pig goes right back to the mud because it’s his nature (natural instinct, part of his genetic brain matter) We have an educated intelligence (part of what theology calls the soul so we have a choice of right or wrong (you have all heard the story of the frog and the scorpion). By not acknowledging a soul or free will, BJ ascribed bad decisions to educated and good decisions to some kind of mystical “innate thought flash”. He was a decent chiropractic philosopher (for his time) but a poor theologian.

Leave a Reply

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