Clearly, DD was focused on restoration/curing of hearing/deafness (getting a “sick” person ‘well” with his original adjustment. Every “getting sick people well approach is based on putting method over objective.That pretty much describes the difference between TSC and OSC and the practice of medicine and chiropractic..
D.D. started chiropractic, B.J. developed chiropractic, I don’t take what D.D. said as being important because it was from an undeveloped point of view. B.J. is the Jesus Christ of chiropractic and I am a follower of him. I don’t buy into this division of chiropractic TSC vs OSC. The objective of chiropractic is to locate and correct VS the cause of Dis-ease not disease. Dis-ease =lack of ease. So that Innate Intelligence can better express over the N.S. When someone is subluxated they are sick, they have dis-ease, B.J. was NOT trying to treat disease or practice medicine. Thanks
Did the development of the light bulb begin and END with Edison and with direct current? Thankfully, no! The difference between Jesus and BJ is that (in my understanding) He was perfect BJ was not and He came to complete/fulfill the (Mosaic) Law becoming the Sacrifice for man’s sin, once and for all .whereas BJ saw VS as the cause of DIS-EASE and it being the cause(which at best) is only one “cause”/influencing factor/LOM in disease, the one Objective Straight chiropractors choose to address.
IF, infact, your OBJECTIVE is to correct the cause of Dis- – – ease you are an Objective Straight Chiropractor, without any reguard to your having kept up with the thinking and terminology of your profession…….
Fortunately, you and I had a teacher who encouraged/motivated us to think further, while not ignoring the principle of chiropractic. I can still remember that day and place when and where you made the statement that has had such an impact upon my life: “in chiropractic, it’s where yo place the PERIOD!”
So nice to know that someone was listening….lol.
Joe, you certainly have clarified the point of having an objective different than treating disease or maybe it was Reggie and you have brought it along or even embellished it. I am not taking that away from you or Reggie. Your contribution to chiropractic is to be commended and I commend you and I appreciate what I have learned from you through seminars and books. My point is that I have read B.J.’s writings and have seen it evolve over his lifetime and in the end I take away from those writings that he developed a separate and distinct profession that located and corrected V.S. to remove the cause of dis-ease. Also he advanced the profession beyond diversified technique and developed HIO.
HIO is about methods and not objectives, thus not a part of this discussion. I approve , personally, of any method that claims to correct VS as a part of straight Chiropractic. The issue as I see it is about the OBJECTIVE as each of us thrust upon a spinal segment, is the objective of the DC at that moment correction/improvement of VS OR is it healing/symptom change/diseases improvement. The former is what we now call OSC; the latter is the practice of Medicine(period)……..That is where I put the period.