So chiropractic will survive without philosophy, as a neutered profession robbed of its foundation, and retaining its name only. Or chiropractic will survive without philosophy, as a clinical art in the hands of therapists who claim it as their own, while scrapping the name and the heritage that caused it to prosper.
Chiropractic philosophy has gotten an unfortunate connotation in some quarters. It is because some members of the profession have taken it to an extreme and made a quasi-religion out of it. The word itself, like many words in the English language, assumes different meanings in different contexts, and among varied populations in the chiropractic profession. Some of them are legitimate, and some have assumed the stature of inflexible dogma indelibly written in stone. This ought not be. I believe a philosophy can be fluid on the basis of increasing knowledge, without being compromised.
In his book, Man the Unknown, Alexis Carrel states that "concepts should not be misused. They must be kept in their place in the hierarchy of science. Biologists, when facing extremely complex problems, have often yielded to the temptation to build up theories and afterwards turn them into articles of faith; and their sciences have crystallized into rigid formulas." We should not fall prey to the same temptation .
Before we continue let us consider some definitions of philosophy:
- Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means.
- The investigation of causes and laws underlying reality.
- The critique and analysis of fundamental beliefs as they come to be conceptualized and formulated.
- The investigation of natural phenomena and its systematization in theory and experiment.
An objective consideration of these definitions should make us conclude that the study of the philosophy of chiropractic is not only valid, but absolutely essential. We must know what we believe to be the truths of chiropractic. We must also know why we believe -- not in the sense of religious faith, but on the basis of the first definition of philosophy we considered: "love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means." Therefore, our adherence to a chiropractic philosophy should not be in the realm of blind faith to an inherited dogma. It should be on the basis of rational thought and ongoing objective scrutiny.
I view philosophy as a critical basis upon which I develop a rationale for the far-reaching physiologic effects of the vertebral adjustment. Philosophical principles also serve to complement the present level of scientific understanding of the neurodynamics of the vertebral subluxation complex.
You do not have to be brilliant to understand the philosophical principle that declares the power that made the body can heal the body -- just perceptive. If you understand this, you realize that chiropractic does not cure any disease -- named or otherwise. The nerve system's ability to adapt or to overcome irritation is the prerogative of the organism. Apart from supernatural intervention, the organism has a complete monopoly of the power to cure. It cannot, even if it would, delegate this power to doctors or outside agencies. The doctor of chiropractic understands that getting well is always an inner process.
D.D. Palmer said, "Chiropractic is the science of the cause of disease, and art of adjusting by hand all subluxations of the three hundred articulations of the human skeletal frame." The proper application of the spinal adjustment, in all its shades and hues, removes nerve interference, stimulates blood flow, eliminates lymphatic congestion, and probably does a lot more than we yet fully understand. All this facilitates the expression of the body's innate intelligence in seeking to create homeostasis or balance, and in maintaining what D.D. Palmer called "tone" down to the cellular level. This is what ultimately cures or heals.
Therefore we can simply state that the chiropractor's application of his art and science is primarily directed at structural vertebral corrections that facilitate the body's natural healing processes without the use of drugs or surgery. Everything else in the chiropractor's armamentarium is to enhance that facilitation through natural means such as diet, hygiene, and exercise.
It is important for the student of chiropractic to understand the difference between the removal of the cause of "disease" and the treatment of "disease." The principal purpose of the doctor of chiropractic is to remove the cause of disease. However, the treatment of effects may become necessary when these effects are creating additional irritations which are forming vicious cycles, e.g., muscle atrophy due to loss of nerve function which is due to subluxation -- ensuing muscle weakness disturbs normal structural equilibrium, which in turn causes recurring subluxation. In this case, the effect (muscle weakness) can be treated by exercise that will permit more lasting spinal correction. When it is necessary to treat effects, you should make certain that the treatment attempted is not in itself an irritation. Only methods that harmonize and are consistent with restoration of anatomical relationship should be used.
The foundation of chiropractic is a wonderful and timeless principle. Even though this is true, we should not take total responsibility for the patient's health. We are their doctor-teachers, but not their all-sufficient healers. We must be aware that insofar as a complete comprehension of all life processes does not seem obtainable, the efficacy of all healing systems is tempered by the inevitability of death and dissolution of the organism.
Allopathic medicine admits privately that their science of today may be the quackery of tomorrow. There are over 20,000 drugs for the medical man. Each succeeding drug attests to the futility of the drugs that have preceded it. You do not have to reflect too far back to appreciate the truth of those statements.
It is interesting how the development of the science, art, and philosophy of chiropractic has a lot to do with its beginnings. When D.D. Palmer restored Harvey Lillard's hearing, several involved factors were significant:
-- There was a structural pathology involving a functional loss. -- The problem was both biomechanical (a fault in the skeletal system) and neurophysiological (it affected the nervous system). -- The condition was reversible. -- The condition was chronic. -- The focus of intervention was the spine. -- The problem was corrected by use of the hands without the use of drugs or surgery.
That serendipitous occurrence in history provided a substantial foundation for the profession we know as chiropractic.
So may I qualify a statement I made before. Yes, I believe the philosophy of chiropractic can be fluid. But its core principle must be changeless because of its truth. I believe chiropractic owns such a philosophy. To the degree that you own it, appreciate it, and apply it -- to that degree you will be an instrument to perpetuate the profession in its noblest and purest state.
Some of the material in this article must be credited to my instructor in chiropractic principles, Mortimer Levine, D.C. I also referenced a study done by Ian Coulter, Ph.D.
Vincent P. Lucido, D.C.
Lakeland, Florida