There is another principle from Stephenson’s 33 chiropractic principles that causes confusion and like the Major Premise (see above) can be made to say more than is meant.  We must be careful not to make that misstep.  That principle is the 20th.  It goes like this: Innate Intelligence – A “living thing” has an inborn intelligence within its body, called Innate Intelligence.

If you read the previous post you will immediately see the first problem.  Stephenson once again capitalizes the term in question.  Thus giving it a sort of personal quality.  But if the principles are taken as a whole one will see we are dealing with natural law and physiology.  Not commentary on metaphysics.  But if one reads this out of context it is easy to think of innate intelligence as something analogous to a “divine spark” or the god within us.  People start referring to it as “my Innate.”  Even at times claiming to listen to their Innate, as if it is a “personal source of intelligence” not a principle.

Now to be totally forthcoming, I have to admit, B. J. Palmer the developer of chiropractic did apply innate intelligence to all matters of life at times.  So if one wants to use only the Palmer sources to debate my point, they have a case.  But I agree with Joseph Strauss (and many others) at this point.  B. J. made mistake when he applied innate intelligence to every aspect of mankind, even the non-physical.

I appreciate what Joseph Strauss says in his book, Chiropractic Philosophy:

“There are many similarities between innate intelligence and universal intelligence.  Both are principles, hence both are impersonal.  This takes chiropractic philosophy out of the mystical or religious realm….It (universal intelligence) is a principle and has certain characteristics, on of which is impersonality…Similarly the innate intelligence of the body is an impersonal principle…It is a principle of organization that causes matter to behave in a certain manner, that is, to adapt to its environment.”

Now WHAT that intelligence is and HOW it came to be a part of us is another matter.  Instinct, genetic information, a creator?  That is not and should not be answered by chiropractic principles and philosophy.  My point has been, there are confusing terms, and some missteps in chiropractic history.  But in the end, the principles that Stephenson wrote for us, do not claim too much.  The innate and universal “intelligences” chiropractors speak of should be understood as principles.  Nothing mystical or personal in nature need be read into it.  Someone who has a theistic worldview or clearly Christian worldview does not need to be turned off or worried about the terms.

So how does this relate?  Along these lines, much is made of the “mind-body” connection in new age health care.  Mind over matter.  If you believe, it will work.  I often hear people say their belief in chiropractic is a key ingredient to it’s effectiveness in their case.  Although I believe a patient can sabotage recovery if they are not committed to care, I know chiropractic WILL work even if someone is skeptical.  The science behind chiropractic will work if we believe in it or not.  Just like gravity.  It will pull an object to the ground every time, no matter how hard we try to believe otherwise.

The point is that chiropractic is based on science and it is well supported by scientific literature.  One only needs to open up the book Upper Cervical Subluxation Complex: A Review of the Chiropractic and Medical Literature by Kirk Eriksen, D.C. and the follow up book by Eriksen and Roderic Rochester, D.C., Orthospinology Procedures: An Evidence Based Approach to Spinal Care to see how much science there is to support chiropractic.  These two books are current favorites of mine, but there are MANY others.

Another interesting point that refutes claims that one must believe in the care they are getting, and the benefits of care are more of a mind over matter placebo effect is …. the area of animal chiropractic.  The current issue of the “ICA Review Fall/Winter 2009″ page 50, has an article about a chiropractor that sees animals as a major part of his practice.  It’s not for everyone, and not for me (an official part of my practice), though I’ve seen it work work with my pets and the pets of a select few friends.  The point is, an animal has no preconceived notions about what should or could happen.  Or even that the doctor is there to help.  So when an animal benefits, we know chiropractic must be having a positive effect on physiology!

In summary, the second reason chiropractic is not new age medicine or just a belief system is that it works on animals.  Sounds strange to say it like that.  But it sure does take it out of the mind body area.

Then came very well credentialed men and women with research, at times, to back them up.  Now my intent is not to point out problems with the new age spiritualities or even new age medicine, but to defend Chiropractic and demonstrate how well it describes the reality, in regards to health and healing in the human body.

So how did we chiropractors get ourselves in this mess?  If you are new to chiropractic, it has been around since 1895.  On that day D. D. Palmer gave what we consider to be, the first chiropractic adjustment.  However, at that time he didn’t fully grasp what he was on to.  For the next 15 or so years, he and his son, B. J. Palmer, developed and articulated their understanding of chiropractic as a new approach to helping people heal and live healthier lives.  In 1927, R. W. Stephenson, a professor at the Palmer School of Chiropractic, wrote Chiropractic Textbook.  It is an amazing text.  In it he wrote a section called “List of Thirty-three principles, numbered and named,” which articulated his ideas of discussion topics.  David B. Koch, D.C., D.Ph.C.S., makes the point in his wonderful book Contemporary Chiropractic Philosophy: An Introduction, that Stephenson could not have known how chiropractors would take his principles and turn them into minimally, a logical progressive argument, or at worst, make them a sort of Ten Commandments.

Now for years, it really aggravated me that these principles where out there!  As a Christian, who tries to maintain a life and career consistent with the Christian worldview, I found some of the principles blurred the line between Christian and new age.  As I understood the two.  But as time has gone on, and with the help of authors like, David Koch, Joseph Strauss, J. P. Moreland, William Lane Craig, Michael Horton, and Greg Koukl, I’ve become better able to see where chiropractic starts and stops.  Less blurred lines.

It took me a while to get here and it is easy to be confused if one is listening to the wrong people in my opinion.  The first major problem is a result of the first two of Stephenson’s principles.  The first is known as “The Major Premise” and goes as follows: A Universal Intelligence is in all matter and continually gives to it all its properties and actions, thus maintaining it in existence.  The second is titled “The Chiropractic Meaning of Life” and goes as follows: The expression of intelligence through matter is the Chiropractic meaning of life.

Now if these principles are taken the wrong way it can slip into a fuzzy pantheistic view of life or reality.  But it is important to notice what isn’t said.  Namely, the universal intelligence isn’t overtly personalized or expounded on.  Earlier in his text Stephenson describes chiropractic as a philosophy, science and art of things natural…  So we can be confident he was not trying to comment on God or his understanding of the supernatural.  Joseph Srauss, D.C. makes a helpful observation in his book, Toward a Better Understanding of The Philosophy of Chiropractic on page 18:

It is true that one could deduce our Major Premise from something else but that “something else” would take us out of the realm of chiropractic philosophy.  Specifically, if you were to accept the existence of deity, you could deduce that universal intelligence was one of its characteristics or attributes.  However, this is outside the realm of chiropractic philosophy.  It should be noted from a historical standpoint that when the Palmers wrote about universal intelligence, they considered it to be either synonymous with God or an attribute of God.  Since we cannot know what the Palmers’ perception of God was, modern chiropractic philosophy begins one step lower than God with the inductively derived concept of universal intelligence.  Consequently, no matter what religious understanding a person has he can accept the major premise and subsequently deduce and accept all the rest of the chiropractic philosophy.

Though I want to be careful to emphasize chiropractic is working in the natural realm according to natural laws, it is important to me that we have always acknowledged the human is more than the sum of his parts.  There is something other than, beyond, and before, matter.  Pure physicalism or naturalism cannot account for everything we see in the natural world, and it is wonderful to be a part of a profession that realized this early on.

David Koch has modified the Major Premise and the Chiropractic Meaning of Life so they carefully communicate as much as they should while not blurring lines between a theistic worldview and a pantheistic worldview.  He recommends they be written as such:

1. There is a universal intelligence in all matter, continuously giving to it all its properties and actions, thus maintaining it in existence, and giving this intelligence its expression.
2. The expression of this innate intelligence through matter is the chiropractic meaning of “life.”

We now have two statements that do not allow for accidental commentary on the meaning of human life and where it came from.  They remain definitional.

So the first reason chiropractic is not “new age medicine” is it has never tried to help a person improve health by acknowledging or manipulating spiritual laws, forces, or agents.