The Conatus Doctrine: A Rational Interpretation of Innate Intelligence

Abstract

Objective

The objective of this article is to reinterpret metaphysical concepts found in chiropractic historic teachings by comparing these to the philosophical system of Baruch Spinoza.

Discussion

Universal intelligence and innate intelligence are components of the historic and traditional philosophy of chiropractic. These concepts have offered a unique clinical perspective at the cost of committing to an a priori assumption that some see as untenable. The meaning of universal and innate intelligence may be reinterpreted through an understanding of life and health as offered by the conatus doctrine of Baruch Spinoza. The conatus doctrine defines within a formal system the striving and endurance of living beings to remain in unique forms. The reinterpretation offered in this article provides a rationally defensible concept closely tied to contemporary definitions of vitalism, which see life as potentiality striving against inertia and entropy. In its striving, life manifests itself by originating meaning out of information.

Conclusion

Though the product of early-modern rationalism, Spinoza's conatus doctrine offers a contemporary interpretation of an aspect of living beings congruent with established notions within the philosophy of chiropractic. Concepts in Spinoza's work that concern substance and monism offer clarifying perspectives on concepts in the philosophy of chiropractic that may help resolve conflicts concerning spiritualism and naturalism.

Introduction

Comparing the thoughts of mid-19th and 20th century thinkers such as Daniel David (DD) Palmer and Bartlett Joshua (BJ) Palmer with the 17th century rationalist philosopher Baruch Benedictus Spinoza may seem a step backward in offering a clinically relevant interpretation of one of chiropractic's core philosophical concepts. Spinoza was a product of the early modern period (Fig 1). Born in the shadow of René Descartes, his contemporaries included the polymath Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Dutch physicist Christiaan Huygens. Though Spinoza is mentioned briefly in one of BJ Palmer's later works,¹ it is worth exploring how Spinoza's modern worldview might relate to the philosophy of the Palmers. Like Spinoza, the basis of DD Palmer's philosophy was inherently modern. Senzon argued:

Fig 1.

Portrait of Benedictus de Spinoza (1632-1677) painted ca 1665.

• Chiropractic and its philosophy reflect the worldviews of the modern era. Chiropractic's founder, DD Palmer (1845-1913), was a modern man, with a modern sense of self, which is most evident in his writings. Palmer's definition of Innate Intelligence (II) is the best example of this modern foundation. Within the definition of II is a separation of body (matter), mind (educated intelligence), soul (intelligent life), and spirit (Innate).^2(p24)

The concept of innate intelligence (II) influences discussions within the philosophy of chiropractic around such topics as the nature of health, the duality of mind and body, and the meaning of vitalism. The continued debate within chiropractic regarding the relevance of metaphysics calls for a refining of terms and basic concepts.^3,4 The philosophical system established in Spinoza's Ethics offers a logical approach through a formal analysis from which basic assertions regarding the nature of life can be derived and compared with both the work of DD and BJ Palmer and advances in neuroscience.5, 6, 7

Spinoza's method of logical reasoning was similar to the syllogisms presented by Stephenson and later by Koch insofar as these later works share a deductive structure with Ethics.^8,9 Like Spinoza, Stephenson and Koch derived conclusions from premises grounded in metaphysical interpretations of reality. Such premises express inherently modern views that integrate material and immaterial aspects of nature within a rational framework. These conclusions can be compared to contemporary ideas of vitalism and human expression, providing a novel interpretation of II. This interpretation could be integrated into current philosophical and clinical discussions, bringing forth a grounded, empirical outlook that retains the immateriality and rejection of absolute reductionism typical of traditional chiropractic thought. The overarching goal of this discussion could be the establishment of a “questioning philosophy” for the study of II.¹⁰

Within Spinoza's Ethics is the conatus doctrine, which may offer rational support for a refinement of the various notions of II.¹¹ It is possible that the conatus doctrine may bring II into a contemporary view of human health that could be reflected in diverse topics, such as vitalism, systems theory, complexity theory, emergence, and autopoiesis. Up to this time, there have been no known published investigations into how Spinoza's conatus doctrine may relate to chiropractic concepts. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to compare the biological and clinical relevance of a traditional metaphysical approach to the nature of life as found in chiropractic historic teachings to the philosophical system of Baruch Spinoza and, from this comparison, offer a new interpretation of II.

Discussion

The Historical Basis of II

To interpret early philosophy of chiropractic, it is imperative that the historical and cultural context are appreciated within which the philosophical concepts were established.¹² Without doing so would result in the loss of accurate meaning of DD and BJ Palmer's works.^13,14,15

Cultural Transformation in 19th Century America

Early philosophy of chiropractic was influenced most heavily by Vitalism and Spiritualism.¹⁶ Spiritualism includes a belief in a spiritual life after bodily death. During the time chiropractic was being developed, followers of Spiritualism believed that, with the guidance of a medium (a person claiming to connect with spirits) or by means of a séance or trance-like state, the deceased could be communed with directly.17, 18, 19 Vitalism represents a plurality of thought centered around the uniqueness of life as a phenomenon that transcends physical properties rather than supervening on them.²⁰

Innate intelligence was likely born from Spiritualism and Vitalism but must be appreciated within the larger social and cultural movements in 19th century America. These movements represented a reaction to socially restrictive Calvinist doctrine, an expression of burgeoning national optimism,^19,21,22 and the ideological rebellion that followed the reductionistic materialism of the Enlightenment.²³

Toward the end of the 18^th century, the covert Enlightenment challenged the hegemony of Newtonian science, bringing new perspectives to the concepts of soul as well as mind and consciousness.²⁴ This movement was led by the mystical investigations of thinkers like Anton Mesmer and Immanuel Swedenborg, who sought to reveal the relationship between the material body and spiritual energies.^19,24,25 These teachings were included in the emergence of spiritualism as a distinct tradition of sectarian American religiosity. Concurrently, the German Counter-Enlightenment offered a liberation of thought and intuition grounded in such works as the naturphilosophie of Joseph Schelling, whose work may be traced directly to Spinoza.26, 27, 28

Mesmerism and Swedenborgianism were likely major influences on DD Palmer's worldview.¹⁹ The cultural significance of these movements was proportional to “…the societal dis-ease that accompanied the dawn of modern American culture.”^19(p63) The rapid growth of cities, population density, and technological advancement, coupled with a general erosion of religious consensus, incited anxiety among many Americans.¹⁹ Thus, the movement in America toward spirituality was part of the zeitgeist of romantic-era metaphysical thought, examples of which can be found in the literary works of the transcendentalists typified by Henry David Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson.^29,30

Daniel David Palmer's Spiritualism

Daniel David Palmer's spiritual views likely drew from the Adventist culture shared during his childhood, where “…discussions included Bible study topics, healthcare and hands-on healing with later topics expanded to visionary prophecy”^31(p30) (Fig 2). Daniel David Palmer's eventual break from the Adventist church in Canada and his relocation to the United States at the end of the American Civil War allowed him a freedom of thought to critically evaluate spirituality in a broader context, which included the American Spiritualist movement.^31,32 Daniel David Palmer's participation in Spiritualism may have increased due to influences such as Drury and Coleville.^13,33 Palmer's first marriage was to a medium named Abba Lord, who applied spiritualist ideas as a “clairvoyant physician.”³³ Palmer assisted Lord in her healing practice, which furthered his own interests in health and healing.^31,33 These experiences may have led him to take up the practice of magnetic healing after being exposed to the work of Caster.^13,34

Fig 2.

Portrait of Daniel David Palmer (1845-1913), founder of chiropractic, photograph ca 1910.

Emerging Worldviews

When DD Palmer observed that Harvey Lillard's hearing improved after applying a manual thrust to Lillard's spine, it may be understandable that Palmer would infer a spiritual dimension to the restoration.³⁵ In this sense, DD Palmer's hypotheses regarding the cause of dis-ease and healing may have been grounded as much in the observational science of his time as in spiritualist concepts such as vital energies that offered a connection with higher cosmic or spiritual powers.^36,37 As Donahue points out:

• Palmer, a religious man, found it incomprehensible to view the inherent recuperative power of the body as nothing but ‘nature, instinct, or intuitive force’. He saw behind that power a larger spiritual force that needed to be understood and explained for the benefit of the sick.^{12(p31),7(p31)}

Daniel David Palmer's worldview may be seen as a natural extension of romantic-era themes pushing back against the mechanistic rigidity of the Enlightenment and the hubris of 19th-century reductionistic medicine.^2,19,25,37

Daniel David Palmer exemplified what Senzon considered to be one of the earliest forms of postmodernism, placing Palmer ahead of others in his time.²⁵ Daniel David Palmer's clinical approach anticipated the recent acknowledgment in healthcare of the importance of integrating biopsychosocial dimensions of health into the management of patient care.³⁸ Daniel David Palmer's metaphysical approach and its further development by his son BJ Palmer provided the basis from which a post-rational reconciliation of Descartes’ mind-body dualism could be attempted.^25,39 Cartesianism since the Enlightenment had classified the mind as a separate substance from matter.⁴⁰ At the time of his early writing, no means of reconciling mind and body seemed sufficient to DD Palmer. Daniel David Palmer hoped to reconcile the division between mind and body, and central to his approach was the concept of II.

Defining II

Early Concepts of Innate Intelligence

Daniel David Palmer first introduced the concept of II in an essay titled Innate Intelligence in 1903.⁴¹ This essay would later be included in the first volume of the Palmer green book series titled Text-Book of the Science, Art and Philosophy of Chiropractic for Students and Practitioners.³⁵ Innate intelligence along with educated intelligence or conscious intelligence were introduced in his writing as “…two mentalities, [which] look after the welfare of the body physically and its surrounding environments.”^35(p19) These writings demonstrate the importance of the relationship between II (a super-conscious quality) and educated intelligence (a quality similar to conscious thought) as distinct immaterial entities that allow for self-preservation and growth.³⁵ From the posthumous writings of DD Palmer published in 1921, he compared innate to other mental states:

• By Innate I refer to that intelligence which is born with and within us, and which continues to furnish vitality to our bodies as long as life lasts. Nature does not include that ever-present intelligence which exists as a separate entity. Instinct is an inward impulse without reason; it prompts our actions. Subconscious mind is a product of Innate, vital phenomena occurring without consideration. Intuition is an apprehension or recognizance without reason. None of these terms expressed the precise meaning I wanted to convey. I, therefore, chose the word Innate, meaning born with.^42(p662)

The explication of mentality was an important consideration for DD Palmer and was an emerging psychological theory in his early philosophical writing. Though DD Palmer's outlook considered soul, mind, and body to be distinct, reconciling the mind with the body and spirit was a primary objective for Palmer, as doing so would allow for the continued spiritual advance of humanity.^2,43

Daniel David Palmer considered the soul to be necessary for linking the material with the immaterial. For him, chiropractic was ‘founded upon’³⁵ a triad uniting the physical with the spiritual, ‘Innate-soul-body.’^35,42 This concept was essential as it represented “…an attempt to reconcile the mind/body split inherent to modernity in an embodied way. The soul is the ‘vital,’ and ‘it consists of expressed functional energy.’ It is synonymous with life.”^2(p29) Daniel David Palmer emphasized the spiritual, vitalistic nature of II stating:

• Innate, spirit, vital force, runs the material body as long as it is habitable—as long as its structure is capable of transmitting impulses and placing them in action. When, by any means, the channels of communication become useless, because of necrosis (softening), or sclerosis (hardening), functions cease and death ensues.^35(p170)

Thus, innate was integral to DD Palmer's interpretation of physiology, acting both as a source of vital information across nerve channels and as the immaterial essence of life unified with the material body by soul.

Categorical Errors in Defining II

Daniel David Palmer's application of religious language (eg, spirit, soul) to his potentially verifiable biological theory grounded in neural tone is an example of the application of concepts to a category that rightly belong to another.³⁸ Semantic problems can be found in early descriptions of II. For instance, DD Palmer seems to conflate “spirit” with “soul” stating:

• Thru the mind Innate (spirit) conducts the functions which control the body and looks after its external welfare. If the reader will turn to all the places where soul is mentioned, I think that thon will get a satisfactory comprehension of what I understand the soul consists.^35(p57)

It is not clear whether DD Palmer used the term soul to be synonymous with spirit (Innate) or whether he was contrasting the 2, and therein lies the confusion. Donahue, years later, attempted to clarify the distinction that DD Palmer ultimately gave to soul and spirit stating:

• Palmer's use of soul is rather unique in that he not only treats it as a separate entity but distinguishes it from the spiritual. Traditionally, religion looks on soul and spirit as synonymous and the producers of life. He stressed, however, that although soul and life are synonymous, they are separate from innate or spirit.^12(p33)

Donahue listed the following 4 categorical qualities of II that define its nature: spiritual identity, spiritual purposes, conscious nature, and physical capabilities.¹² The grouping of these qualities illustrates the transcendent nature of II emanating from a spiritual plane while acting directly upon the physical. The ability of II to cross that divide was essential to the structure of DD Palmer's way of thinking and reinforced his emphasis on soul. Palmer elucidates:

• At birth there is an exchange in the management of the physical provisions; the fetus is severed from the mother; Innate, the metamere of Universal Intelligence, is segmented. Individualized spirit and a somite of matter form a new being. These are linked together by the soul, a living entity. Educated Intelligence looks after its environment in proportion to its development.^35(p499)

Daniel David Palmer's central hypothesis proposed that the nervous system was the vehicle through which spirit and matter interacted, representing a new synthesis of ideas from magnetic healing, spiritualism, and neurophysiology.^19,41 The inherent problem with this description, however, was that in describing II Palmer used the same term in 2 distinct categories, namely the spiritual/religious and the biological.³⁷

The segmentation of universal intelligence (UI) as II has drawn criticism. Mirtz suggested that this segmentation represented a blow to the omnipotence of DD Palmer's concept of God as UI and conflicts with Lutheran theology.⁴⁴ Others argued that despite DD Palmer's stance, God and UI are not one and the same but rather distinct entities and that contemporary philosophy of chiropractic makes no definitive statement regarding the existence of a deity.^9,45,46

The Essence of II

If one interprets DD Palmer's metaphysical thesis through an historical lens, the essence of II is a fundamental organizing force internal to all living systems.³⁷ To better understand, one must consider looking past the religious language used to describe UI and II. The centrality of DD Palmer's idea emphasized that living things strived to remain in a form unique to their identity or essence; that is, for living things to resist (for a time) the entropic disintegration common to all physical objects. Striving was intimately connected to health and healing and was obtained from the very order of the universe itself. As DD Palmer explained, “Innate does the best it can, adapting itself to conditions under which it exists. We can see this intelligence displayed in all animal and vegetable life. A duality of the spiritual and physical— spiritual beings and mortal existence.”^42(p670)

Given his upbringing and spiritual influences, DD Palmer may have adopted a spiritual explanation for this phenomenon. Asking why living things resist the inevitability of entropy was at the core of Palmer's view of health. DD Palmer stated:

One question was always uppermost in my mind in my search for the cause of disease. I desired to know why one person was ailing and his associate, eating at the same table, working in the same shop, at the same bench, was not. Why? What difference was there in the two persons that caused one to have pneumonia, catarrh, typhoid or rheumatism, while his partner, similarly situated, escaped? Why?^35(pp17-18)

Daniel David Palmer's curiosity about the nature of life and its striving to endure was similar to Baruch Spinoza's conatus doctrine.⁴⁷ Examining recent interpretations of Spinoza's conatus doctrine in the light of modern neuroscience and psychology may provide a rational reinterpretation of II as that phenomenon that lies at the core of one's sense of self.

A New Interpretation of II

The Conatus Doctrine

In his masterwork Ethics, Spinoza introduced a principle that guided him throughout the rest of the work and brought together his moral psychology, ethics, and political theory.⁴⁸ The doctrine of the conatus is a universal striving by each natural thing for self-preservation.⁴⁸ In proposition 6 of the third section (3p6), he stated, “Each thing, insofar as it is in itself, strives to persevere in its being.”^49(p137) Viljanen underscored the importance of this doctrine to Spinoza's philosophy asserting, “It is uncontroversial that there are few stages in [Spinoza's] journey more important than the doctrine of striving (conatus) as our actual essence; so much of Spinoza's ethical project depends on that doctrine.”^50(p95) The emphasis on actual essence, in this case, speaks to the fundamental nature of living things as beings who strive to persist and, in doing so, instantiate their existence in the world. This is to say that life's very essence is a striving against that which is potentially destructive.

The conatus doctrine has many philosophical antecedents. The way in which it was formulated repeat Descartes’ first law of nature, “[E]ach thing, insofar as it is in itself, always continues in the same state”^51(p240) It also recapitulates Thomas Hobbes’ metaphysics, which asserts that everything is ultimately explicable in terms of motion, the beginnings of which is a striving or endeavor.^50,52

The Role of Teleology

Teleology, in its most general sense, points to an end-directedness or to some ultimate goal or purpose for phenomena.⁵³ Daniel David Palmer offered a strong teleological account stating, “God—The Universal Intelligence—The Life-Force of Creation—has been struggling for countless ages to improve upon itself—to express itself intellectually and physically higher in the scale of evolution.”^35(p446) For DD Palmer, humanity was seen as instrumental in this pursuit.

By contrast, Spinoza framed his philosophical system as categorically non-teleological, insisting that occurrences in the world happen strictly by deterministic laws of cause-and-effect.⁴⁷ Despite Spinoza's commitment to determinism, some scholars have argued that his work, particularly the conatus doctrine, rests upon an inherent teleology.54, 55, 56, 57 Spinoza's deterministic stance is best observed in the third axiom of the Ethics, which states, “From a given determinate cause an effect necessarily follows; and, on the other hand, if no determinate cause be given, it is impossible that an effect can follow.”^47(p355) Spinoza's attempt to shift away from teleological explanations reframes the nature of God away from a singular deity into a singular substance commensurate with nature itself, establishing what has been considered a substance monism or panpsychism in Spinoza's system.58, 59, 60, 61

Spinoza offered the following definition of substance: “By substance, I understand that which is in itself and is conceived through itself; in other words, that, the conception of which does not need the conception of another thing from which it must be formed.”^47(p355) Spinoza saw all existing things as derived or extended from some prior or contingent thing. Therefore, substance then must be that from which all things emanate or are derived. In Spinoza's understanding of the universe, substance may have had an infinite number of attributes (means of expression), yet only 2 are known to mankind: thought and matter.⁴⁷ The attribute of thought gives rise to ideas and passions, while the attribute of matter gives rise to all physical objects. From this understanding, it could be inferred that substance strives toward the expression of these individual modes in a teleological fashion. However, making such a claim runs counter to the deterministic cause-and-effect underlying Spinoza's system. Herein lies the tension regarding the role of teleology in Spinoza's work. Whether Spinoza adopted an implicit teleology or upheld a strict determinism bears upon the meaning of conatus and the striving of life. The issue itself speaks to the perspectival shift of modernity of which Spinoza epitomizes.⁶²

Daniel David Palmer's reliance on teleology has been used to show the pre-modern roots of his thinking while maintaining a postmodern worldview.²⁵ It is ironic that DD Palmer's reliance on teleology, particularly his dependence on theistic definitions of UI, has been the cause of much of the controversy that has resulted since the publication of the 1910 text, whereas the abandonment of such notions was used to justify Spinoza's ostracism from the Jewish community and the banning of his books.⁶³

Reconciling Mind and Body

Comparing the nature of DD Palmer's UI to Spinoza's God highlights the different roles that each played in their respective systems. For DD Palmer, UI is the source of II; thus, II is “metamerized”^35(p491) or segmented from UI. For Spinoza, the conatus is intrinsic to the individual's essence. Each individual is understood as a mode whose source can be traced to some attribute of the single substance that is God or nature. As Spinoza declared, “Deus sive natura,” or “God is nature.”^60(p512) The mereological relationship of parts to wholes in both DD Palmer's view of II as metamerized from UI and Spinoza's system of modes-attributes-substance reveal that they are grounded in similar commitments. A similar goal shared by both DD Palmer and Spinoza is that mind and body may be unified with the universe as a whole.

Daniel David Palmer accomplished mind-body unification with his concept of soul. Spinoza unified mind and body by seeing them as extended from a common substance, God or nature. This is often cited as a parallelism in Spinoza's system.⁶⁴ What this parallelism offered Spinoza was a means of answering the mind-body problem by establishing mind as the idea of the body.⁵

This manner of seeing mind as the idea of the body shares important similarities with William James’ psychological view of mind and emotion emerging from body states.^65,66 The proposition that emotions are caused by bodily sensations was first put forward by James in 1884⁶⁷ and further developed in his Principles of Psychology.⁶⁵ James’ thesis ran counter to the notion that bodily changes arise from the mental perception of some state of affairs. James asserted that the perception of some event by the body effects changes that themselves are the source of emotion. In James’ words, “We feel sorry because we cry, angry because we strike, afraid because we tremble.”^65(p449)

In 1885, Lange independently offered a similar theory that placed no emphasis on emotion as a mental state, equating emotion instead with bodily, especially visceral, events.⁶⁸ This view of the body giving rise to mental events is described by Damasio, who tied the concept to conatus stating:

The phenomena we have discussed…emotions proper, appetites, and simpler regulatory reactions-occur in the theatre of the body under the guidance of a congenitally wise brain designed by evolution to help manage the body. Spinoza intuited that congenital neurobiological wisdom and encapsulated the intuition in his conatus statements, the notion that, of necessity, all living organisms endeavor to preserve themselves without conscious knowledge of the undertaking and without having decided, as individual selves, to undertake anything. In short, they do not know the problem they are trying to solve. When the consequences of such natural wisdom are mapped back in the brain, the result is feelings, the foundational components of our minds. Eventually…feelings can guide a deliberate endeavor of self-preservation and assist with making choices regarding the manner in which self-preservation should take place.^5(p79)

The unconscious striving of life to maintain its form underscores both the conatus doctrine and II. The intersection of conatus and II is found in DD Palmer's writing, where the term “conation” is defined as “desire and volition.”^43(p3) In this use of the term by DD Palmer, we find an observation about life congruent with the conclusions elaborated on by Damasio; that living things are innately guided by complex adaptive systems to persevere, on an unconscious level, to remain in their form. Interpreting II this way offers a rational definition built from its metaphysical foundation.

Understanding II Through Conatus

Familiar forms of perseverance, like homeostasis, are states of being but not that which give rise to such states. It may be reasonable to suggest that a viable interpretation of II would point to those fundamental properties and relationships of matter that allow for the emergence of form (in inorganic structures) and a conatus in living beings. This perseverance or conatus is (as Spinoza argues) instantiated at every hierarchical level of matter and represents a property epitomized in living organisms.⁵⁴ Using this proposed interpretation, a simple example of the II of water would be the aggregate chemical properties of hydrogen and oxygen atoms along with the unique relationship made when these atoms combine, giving rise to the unique characteristics of water in its various states. The conatus of water, therefore, would be merely the tendency of water to remain in its particular form or state of being as a result of its constituent parts and the relationship of these parts to one another.

Extending this interpretation, the role of conatus in the description of living things can clarify the distinction between UI and II. As described earlier, II can be thought of as a descriptive term for properties and relationships in matter that give rise to particular forms at the individual level, and from these particular forms, a conatus. This establishes a hierarchy of complexity where UI can be understood as those properties and relationships of matter that establish a stable form at the universal scale entailing the whole of reality. The differences in form at each level of complexity allow for the emergence of novel states of being. Reinterpreting UI and II this way is also congruent with 2 divergent interpretations of life found in Stephenson's rendering of the traditional principles of chiropractic.⁸ Delineating these dual meanings is an essential step in any philosophical criticism of Stephenson's work.⁹ The 2 meanings can be observed by examining the term “universal life” in Stephenson's principle 14, which refers both to the “expression of intelligence” in the simple organization of all matter and the “expression of intelligence” in the internal functions and adaptations we traditionally think of as life.^9(pp23-24) Koch offers a resolution to this double meaning by suggesting the term “life” be reserved for biological phenomena alone. For all other real, non-biological structures, he recommends the term “organization” and, in doing so, begins untangling UI and II.^9(p24) Koch makes the case by arguing:

If the universe's ‘universal intelligence’ is assumed to be the cause of the properties and actions of all matter, and not just the properties and actions of living organisms, then its expression in all matter can be said to be represented by the state of organization of any and all forms of matter…Physically, even life itself exists as a specific organizational state (admittedly highly complex and dynamic) of specific material elements. Thus, if we wish to refer to the expression of ‘universal intelligence’ in any and all matter, or in the universe as a whole, we are referring to the specific and particular state of organization of any particular bit of matter, or of the universe as a whole.^9(p24)

From Koch's perspective, the mind is something extended from the organizing whole of the universe. Thus, universal organization is tied to the conative adaptation of life because organization is expressed in living things as adaptive nerve impulses in response to internal and external challenges.⁹

This line of reasoning is similar to Spinoza's notion of being and essence that lie at the heart of the conatus doctrine.⁶⁹ Martin Lin asked, “What does Spinoza mean by being? He means that [finite things] try to stay in existence. Existence, for Spinoza, is closely tied to the notion of essence.”^54(p139) Lin clarifies the importance of essence by pointing to Spinoza's discussion of complex individuals, such as living beings, which were defined by a pattern or organization that obtains between their parts. Spinoza thought of these unique patterns (organization) and motion as the nature of the complex body. Lin explained, “Spinoza often uses nature and essence interchangeably. Because the nature of a complex body is its pattern of motion and rest, persevering in existence or being is equivalent to persevering in its pattern of motion and rest.”^54(p140)

Thus, we find the concept of organization was an essential locus of agreement between Spinoza and Koch's contemporary chiropractic upon which both philosophical systems turn. This is indeed the defining principle of general systems theory, whose relation to chiropractic has been examined by Callender.¹⁶ By emphasizing organization, UI allows for the emergence of II and, thus, conative properties in living organisms. In adopting this view, chiropractic writers have tied the success of conatus to the function of the nervous system. From these arguments, the conatus arises from the basic constituents of life, allowing for the perseverance of form; thus, it is proposed that the nervous system regulates this conative process giving rise to brain states which form feelings and the very sense of self.

An Empirical II

Based on these arguments, II may be considered the unique organization of ordered and stable forms of matter in living things. Innate intelligence can thus be considered a label both for the unique organization of constituent parts as well as the unique properties that emerge from the relationships obtained from that organization. This author's interpretation of II is coherent with the theory of hylomorphism, at least in so far as II relates to inorganic matter. Hylomorphism is an Aristotelian theory that sees objects as composites of form and matter. Matter being the stuff out of which objects are made (the raw elements), and form being the principle that unifies matter into a cohesive whole (organization).⁷⁰

As it relates to non-living matter, II can be understood as a kind of hylomorphism, and as such, the meaning of the term stands on its own without need of spiritual grounding. As an expression of hylomorphism, however, II yet retains a non-physical component, namely, the principle of form or rather the information giving rise to order, organization, and form. Extrapolating this hylomorphic notion to the scale of living beings, II is the necessary and sufficient form and matter (organization) from which any living being comes to exist and actively endures throughout life. It is the propensity of life to endure as itself, in its own unique way, that defines the conatus in individuals. Combining these concepts, then, we arrive at the following definition: II is the necessary and sufficient form and matter from which conative properties emerge in all living beings.

To build this concept up from the most basic examples of life to the level of human beings, Damasio stated that “All living organisms from the humble amoeba to the human are born with devices designed to solve automatically, no proper reasoning required, the basic problems of life.” ^5(p30) Damasio described these inborn devices as the “homeostatic machine” and used the metaphor of a multibranched tree to illustrate the hierarchy of mechanisms that comprise this machine and thus contribute to conatus. The lowest branches of the tree include primitive functions such as metabolism, basic reflexes, and the immune system. These primitive functions coalesce to form more complex processes that manifest behaviors associated with pleasure (reward) and pain (punishment), what Damasio considers middle-level branches. These functions are purely mechanistic and reactionary, requiring no mental state or cognition. Built from these middle branches, the next level up in this metaphorical tree comprise what Damasio labels drives and motivations, such as hunger, thirst, curiosity, etc. These are similar to what Spinoza describes in the Ethics as appetites.⁷¹ At the penultimate level, Damasio placed “emotions-proper” or what he referred to as “…the crown jewel of automated life regulation.”^5(p34) Emotions are described as states of joy, sorrow, fear, pride, shame, and sympathy. At the apex of Damasio's tree, feelings or passions reign.

Damasio suggests that, “All of these reactions are aimed, in one way or another, directly or indirectly, at regulating the life process and promoting survival.”^5(p35) From Damasio's point of view, the evolutionary unfolding of life has developed a drive that pushes the living beyond the actions necessary for mere survival but to thriving. He asserts, “…The innate equipment of life regulation does not aim for a neither-here-nor-there neutral state midway between life and death. Rather, the goal of the homeostasis endeavor is to provide a better than neutral life state, what we as thinking and affluent creatures identify as wellness and well-being.”^5(p35)

This “innate equipment of life regulation” in all its particular form and matter is what should be meant by II; its emergent teleological drive represents a conatus. Its uniqueness to the individual circumstances of every living thing warrants the distinctive label II. What Damasio described is a rational approach to understanding the essential components driving emotions, which underscore the sense of self. He relates this directly with conatus by stating:

• It is apparent that the continuous attempt at achieving a state of positively regulated life is a deep and defining part of our existence-the first reality of our existence as Spinoza intuited when he described the relentless endeavor (conatus) of each being to preserve itself…What is Spinoza's conatus in current biological terms? It is the aggregate of dispositions laid down in brain circuitry that, once engaged by internal or environmental conditions, seeks both survival and well-being.^{5(p36)62(p36)}

Damasio's model is similar to Koch's interpretation of UI in that it relies upon unique relationships between form and matter. Once these relationships are established, properties emerge at the organismic level that allows for the unfolding of strategies not just for survival but for thriving. The regulation of this panoply of information occurs within the nervous system, bringing forth consciousness and feeling that act as the premier drivers of self-development and conatus. The concept of self-development lies at the heart of contemporary definitions of vitalism that are used within the chiropractic profession.^72,73 Examples can be seen in definitions of vitalism from chiropractic programs such as “…living organisms are self-developing, self-maintaining and self-healing”⁷³ and that “Vitalism understands the human body is striving for organization….”⁷⁴

Based upon these arguments, I propose that the mind is a product of information provided by the body and its surroundings. This interpretation breaks the Cartesian mind-body duality, as Spinoza and DD Palmer sought to do, and establishes a unity based on information. This is not to suggest that first-person experience or consciousness can be reduced to purely physical events,^75,76 but rather that egoistic mind and emotion are phenomena that are inherently body-dependent, the basis of which is information.

The mind constructs consciousness from afferent information communicated via neural pathways from the body (interoception or general visceral afferent information) as well as its surroundings (exteroception).^6,7 This information is integrated into neural maps that drive forward conative strategies.⁷⁷ Spinoza grounded these strategies in the components of emotion and feeling, which underscored the very sense of self.^78,79 Solomon concurs, taking the position that these feelings or passions “…constitute our lives. It is our passions, and our passions alone, that provide our lives with meaning.”^80(pxvi) The sense of self constituted by our passions acts recursively to modify the behaviors of the body, further promoting conative action. This recursive view of action from information is implicit in Spinoza's view of adequate knowledge found in his writings in Ethics.⁸¹

The construction of mind as information gathered from the body allows an escape from the regress of the Cartesian theater that sees the mind as a watcher from within. Instead, as Spinoza intuited, the mind is the isomorphic mental representation of integrated information collected from the body.⁸² The synthesized information is then fed forward in a self-supporting fashion, bound together with neural patterns that are pre-established by evolutionary success. From this perspective, II can be further defined as the necessary and sufficient form and matter from which conative properties emerge, allowing for the expression of emotions (passions) and ultimate meaning in life.⁸³ From the perspective of human passion as providing meaning, we find a position that is similar to the second principle in Stephenson's interpretation of the chiropractic principles, “The expression of this intelligence through matter is the Chiropractic meaning of life.”^8(pxxxi)

Implications for Vitalism and Clinical Concerns

This reinterpretation of II offered in the previous section links information derived from the body to the development of conatus and the emergence of meaning. Information as a discreet, analyzable concept spans various disciplines from engineering, to mathematics, to philosophy and is currently a topic of rigorous investigation.84, 85, 86, 87, 88 Intrinsic to the study of information is the potential for noise in communication channels. Similarly, one of the most enduring ideas within the science, art, and philosophy of chiropractic, as included in the Palmers’ green book series, is that neural transmission can be interfered with.^35,89 There is evidence in current neuroscience literature supporting informational hypotheses of interference that offer testable empirical models.^84,90 Chiropractic can make use of these models by grounding II informationally. An information-based interpretation shifts the connotation of II from an anthropomorphic metaphor to a term similar to intelligence as it is used in the context of “military intelligence,” that is, information. This is a stance that could be considered by those who advocate for the elimination of animist forms of vitalism grounded upon older interpretations of II.91, 92, 93 For chiropractors, the implications of interference might extend beyond biomechanical or musculoskeletal effects to a constraining of conative potential and the sense of self.

On a human level, “the self” is our very personhood, our identity. From a Spinozist perspective, “the self” means the very essence of being that manifests the individual's striving to remain in form (the conatus) based upon behavior or action.⁴⁸ These are not mutually exclusive notions of self. They are bound together in contemporary interpretations of vitalism that see life as potential.⁹⁴ From a vitalistic perspective, an individual's expression of disease (pathos) is an attempt at expressing conatus within a narrowed capacity.⁹⁵ What is derived from contemporary vitalism is that diagnosis, as the identification of signs and symptoms isolated from the sense of self, constitutes a misunderstanding of both the dependent workings of the body and the phenomenology of being. A tenable contemporary vitalism may demand more than the treatment of the patient in an effort to combat pathos. A patient is a living being in whose striving we must support and encourage toward achieving greater capacities for adaption and expression over imposed limitation. Osborne illuminates this view in the context of contemporary vitalism:

• In terms of the human organism, the doctor is always on the side of life, aiming to restore the organism to relatively balanced norms even if these are less than fully ‘normative’. In this sense sickness is not an absence of ‘normal’ functioning but the advent of a more constricted normative world.^95(p194)

This clinical perspective acknowledges that the patient is not his or her diagnosis or pathos but is a living being striving against the reality of constraint. This concept is congruent with contemporary definitions of vitalism.94, 95, 96, 97 We see this definition of vitalism in the works of Georges Canguilhem who sought to establish the fundamental meaning of the normal by means of a philosophical analysis of life understood as activity of opposition to inertia and indifference. Life tries to win against death in all the senses of the verb to win, foremost in the sense of winning in gambling. Life gambles against growing entropy.^98(p236)

I suggest that this activity of opposition, this striving, is conatus.

Limitations

This article reflects the author's interpretation of historical writings and theories alone. It is acknowledged that the author's perspectives on history and philosophy can influence this writing and may constitute bias. This work assumes ontological realism (the idea that at least some aspects of reality are independent of human minds), which is not universally accepted. Any attempt at interpreting philosophical concepts carries the possibility of error, despite the author having reviewed a wide variety of sources. This article is limited to the author's choice of supporting references and theoretical framework. Additional research is needed to assess the veracity and utility of the ideas presented.

Conclusion

This article has compared the traditional metaphysical approach to the nature of life as found in chiropractic historic teaching to the philosophic system of Baruch Spinoza. From this comparison, I have offered a new definition of II, which states that II is the unique hylomorphic relationship of form and matter from which conative properties emerge, allowing for the expression of emotions (passions) and meaning in life. This proposed definition was used to draw a distinction between states of being (homeostasis, allostasis) and that which gives rise to such states. Defining II this way offers a rational justification for the use of the term as it pertains to questions and investigations of a philosophical and clinical nature.

This article has further shown that the interests of DD Palmer and other chiropractic authors parallel those of Spinoza and recapitulate questions regarding the nature of life across similar philosophical disciplines. The conclusions drawn by these authors regarding II are similar to the conclusions drawn by Spinoza regarding conatus but have been approached from different theological and philosophical perspectives. Similarities offer an opportunity to compare ideas of chiropractors with those of Spinoza regarding the nature of life but do not make them synonymous. What the conatus doctrine offers is an identifier for the self-preserving behaviors that emerge from II. Though a product of early-modern rationalism, the conatus doctrine offers a contemporary interpretation of the role of II within the philosophy of chiropractic. It does so by grounding its commitments in hylomorphism as opposed to untestable metaphors and a priori assumptions. The interpretation offered here may allow II to undergo empirical investigation while admitting the vitalistic creativity and striving of life born from the structure of the universe.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Garrett Shelby for thoughtful input on concepts included in this article.

Funding Sources and Conflicts of Interest

No funding sources or conflicts of interest were reported for this study.

Contributorship Information

Concept development (provided idea for the research): J.T.T.

Design (planned the methods to generate the results): J.T.T.

Supervision (provided oversight, responsible for organization and implementation, writing of the manuscript): J.T.T.

Analysis/interpretation (responsible for statistical analysis, evaluation, and presentation of the results): J.T.T.

Literature search (performed the literature search): J.T.T.

Writing (responsible for writing a substantive part of the manuscript): J.T.T.

Critical review (revised manuscript for intellectual content, this does not relate to spelling and grammar checking): J.T.T.

Practical Applications.

• •This article offers a reinterpretation of the traditional concept of innate intelligence (II) as the unique relationship of form and matter from which conative properties emerge in living things, allowing for the expression of emotions (passions) and meaning in life.
• •It further argues for the continued use of II as it pertains to questions of a philosophical and clinical nature within the chiropractic literature.
• •Additionally, this article broadens the perspective of the philosophy of chiropractic into domains of academic philosophy.

Alt-text: Unlabelled box