Midway through my first quarter philosophy class I posed the question to students: "Is there one innate intelligence or two in the development of a fetus?" That is, does the fetus have its own individual innate intelligence or does it "share" the mother's? After a day of discussion the class was divided. The purpose of the question and subsequent discussion was to give the students a better understanding of what exactly the innate intelligence of the body is. The student at this point usually understood the innate intelligence within the frame of reference of his or her pre-chiropractic education in philosophy, science, religion, or the humanities. The discussion served the very valuable purpose of correcting their perspective. It is an accepted or an a priori fact that there is innate intelligence within the fetus. The developing fetus is perhaps the greatest demonstration of the principle of life that is the basis for the practice of chiropractic. Is the innate intelligence of the fetus the same expression of life that is within the mother or is there a principle of life within the fetus expressing itself independent of the innate intelligence of the mother? If there are two separate expressions of innate intelligence, (ii) then we must conclude that they are in "communication" because the functions of the fetus and the mother are so closely interrelated. Yet we know that there is no such thing as communication between innate intelligence. Contrary to the belief of those who practice a certain technique, communication is not possible. "Innate Intelligence is limited by limitations of matter." -Stephenson. There can be no communication between two separate ii. We are left then with two possibilities: 1. There is one overriding principle _ that is, innate intelligence expressing itself through a unique unit of matter, namely a "mother-fetus". 2. There are two principles of life being expressed through two different units of matter. The latter position offers some real difficulties. First, if there are two separate ii we would have a constant battle between the mother and the fetus for supremacy. We know the innate intelligence of the body will never do anything to harm the tissues in which it resides, therefore, the innate intelligence of the mother would not stand for the baby's innate intelligence robbing it of vital nutrition e.g., calcium from the bones and teeth. The development of a fetus into a healthy newborn is a tremendous strain on the well being of the mother. Her innate intelligence would not tolerate it unless that developing fetus were a part of her, expressing the same innate intelligence. As part of her body, at least for a period of nine months, her innate intelligence will make sacrifices elsewhere (teeth and bones) to preserve the development. At the moment the umbilical cord is cut that new little baby begins to express its own innate intelligence because the matter of the baby and the matter of the mother are separate. Here is the key. To understand the ii, we have to look at the matter. That is always the key. Inasmuch as we only understand ii by perceiving the matter through which it expresses we must consider the matter in this case. Where does the fetus end and the mother begin? Is the umbilical cord and placenta part of the mother or part of the fetus? They are all parts of the whole. Two examples may help to clarify our understanding. In Siamese twins are there two ii's or one? Obviously, to be consistent we would have to say that there is one innate intelligence expressing itself through a unique organism. That organism may have two nervous systems, two brains, four kidneys, and two hearts. The amount and the arrangement of the matter does not affect the ii. The ii of a one celled amoebae is the same as the ii of a human being. The ii of the human being just has more matter and has it arranged differently. If those twins are successfully separated then we have innate intelligence expressing itself through two separate organisms. One last example which is the exact situation of the developing fetus. Years ago the minister of our local church grafted a pink dogwood and a white dogwood together. He really enjoyed seeing the expression on peoples' faces in the spring when they saw a half-pink and half-white dogwood tree growing in his front yard. He had taken two trees, (each with its own ii), grafted them together, and created a new organism with ii. This ii expressed itself through the entire tree, part of which bore pink flowers, part of which bore white. This example brings up a final point regarding the innate intelligence of the "mother-fetus." At the moment of conception, when the ovum and the sperm unite, there is a new organism, separate and distinct from the mother (although within her body) with its own individual ii which is technically called "cellular intelligence." If and when that fertilized egg implants in the uterine wall, it no longer expresses a separate ii. It is once again part of the mother and the ii of the mother's body is expressing itself through that unique bit of matter and will continue to do so for the next nine months. The innate intelligence of the body is a principle, a law which expresses itself through living matter. It is important that we understand what it is and understand what it is not in order to be the most effective chiropractors we can be.
FREEDOM AND EQUALITY The first 65 years of our profession's history was marked by a desire for freedom. The pioneers in chiropractic fought for, lobbied for, and spent great sums of money, time, and energy to secure the freedom to practice chiropractic and to promote the benefits of it. There were many in the medical establishment who fought just as hard to deny us that freedom. Despite the medical efforts today, chiropractic enjoys the greatest freedom in its history. With few exceptions, a graduate of chiropractic college can open an office in any community in which he or she desires and practice unmolested. He or she has the freedom and the opportunity to be successful; to rise to the level of his or her ability; and to obtain unbelievable wealth. Truly that can only happen in a nation like the United States of America. In Soviet Russia where freedom is virtually nonexistent, a chiropractor would live in a one bedroom apartment and share a common bathroom with a laborer, school teacher, physician, or retired worker despite his or her ability. When our Founding Fathers formed this republic, they obviously did not think about chiropractic. But life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are as much a part of the chiropractic philosophy as they are a part of the Declaration of Independence. Chiropractic deals with life. An understanding of the chiropractic philosophy gives you liberty or freedom from the fear of disease. In surveys, the majority of people say that health is a prerequisite to happiness. Being healthy surely gives people the opportunity to pursue those things which will give them happiness. Chiropractic, like the government, does not guarantee happiness, just the opportunity to pursue it. There is another principle upon which this country was founded: the principle of equality. It appears, however, that the framers of our constitutional government had a somewhat different concept of equality than we have today. The same men who said "all men are created equal" also allowed slavery to exist and denied women the right to vote. It seems that to ,ÿ3 them equality meant equal opportunity for the pursuit of happiness and that men would be equal as far as the law was concerned. Don't forget, they came from an environment where there was one set of laws for the common man and one set for nobility. They surely did not believe that all men are created equal. Mankind is not equal, physically, mentally, or emotionally. If we were, six other runners would have crossed the finish line at the same time as Carl Lewis thus turning the Olympics into a boring predictable event. Equality would destroy the challenge of all sports. The object of all sports is to see which individual or team is superior on a given day. Equality would destroy free enterprise. If every product and service were the same, there would be no incentive in business and industry. In a real sense, freedom and equality are antithetical. The more freedom you have the less equality you have. Russia has near total equality and virtually no freedom. We, in the chiropractic profession, are enjoying our greatest freedom since 1895. But, we are now looking for equality. We desire status in the community, equal recognition by the government, and its agencies, and equality as far as the third party payers are concerned. I think the word is "parity". There is nothing wrong with equality when something is truly the same. There is nothing wrong with equality as long as it does not destroy freedom but, under most situations it does. Our pursuit of equality with the medical profession is destroying our freedom in chiropractic. We are no longer free to teach the subject matter in chiropractic colleges that we choose and in a manner that we choose. Equality demands that our education be the same, at least that is the thinking of many of our leaders. But perhaps the greatest example and the one that touches upon almost every chiropractic office is insurance equality. There are numerous courses taught which show you how you can have virtually all your claims paid just like the M.D. However, in order to do that you must give up your freedoms. Give up the freedom to call yourself a chiropractor and instead call yourself a "physician" and your percentage of claims paid will rise. Make a diagnosis, thereby relinquishing the freedom to be honest and state what you do, analyze and correct vertebral subluxations and your percentage rises. Incorporate numerous procedures as does the "treating physician" and you can charge 40, 60, 80 dollars per visit. Before long your case fee is equal to that of the medical doctor. Unfortunately in so doing, you have become a slave to needless, mostly worthless, and perhaps dangerous procedures that roll, heat, massage, and electrically affect the body of a person who needs only an adjustment to restore the health to his or her body. The chiropractor also gives up the freedom of being self-employed for the security of a regular government or insurance company check. There is nothing wrong with security, we all desire it. However, there is something wrong with giving up our freedom to obtain it. Freedom is never taken away quickly or all at once. It occurs insidiously. There is always something seemingly more valuable given in its place. In the case of contemporary chiropractic, it is the idea of equality with the Medical profession and the potential of making vast sums of money that attract the chiropractor. When you think about it, every nation of the world that is enslaved by a Marxist-socialist government (Russia, China, Cuba, Eastern Europe and parts of Africa) have all allowed their freedom to be taken away and in fact encouraged it because those who desired to enslave them offered the population two things equality and a better standard of living. Will chiropractic give up its principle and the freedom to practice that principle for equality and the promise of a better living? Many in our profession are willing. Let us hope that enough are not willing so that our profession and principle will be preserved for our posterity to enjoy.
