Old Chiropractic Tolerance- accepting/respecting therapeutic chiropractors even though their procedures and actions were unacceptable.
New Chiropractic Tolerance-considering their procedures and actions as now acceptable.
The new tolerance will lead to the destruction of our profession.
Therapeutics are not based on SOUND chiropractic principles and are not motivated by the chiropractic objective which is LACVS for a full expression of the innate intelligence of the body.
That objective must be maintained when practicing chiropractic or chiropractic runs the risk of becoming just like osteopathy or medicine.
Your conclusion is accurate. This NEW tolerance WILL destroy the profession. It CANNOT destroy any chiropractic principles as they are constructed on sound deductive reasoning backed by a Major Premise which is absolute. Would any tolerance destroy the law of gravity? Universal laws are immutable. Universal intelligence is immutable and so is innate intelligence immutable.
Sorry to say but I think it is now them, that tolerate us.
I wish that was the case, Steve. They cannot live and let live. They have to destroy us or force us to conform to their approach. That’s what this whole CCE thing, that you are so involved in, is all about, “them” trying to make us practice in their model. That’s not tolerance! One day in the not too distant future, I will publish the history of ADIO Institute of Straight Chiropractic and outline the lengths the mixers went to (and still are) in order to destroy straight chiropractic. Here’s a question for everyone: Why are they so intolerant of our approach to practice? Is it because we are a threat to the safety of the public, as they say, or because we are a threat to their way of practice and what they want to make chiropractic?
Sorry, I’m considered a mixer and have been studying Dr.Strauss’ material lately and trying to get my mind around all this after 14 years of mixing and it is difficult after my northwestern training and trying to get more philosophically educated. When the post about upper cervical came up someone said they were intolerant of other techniques, and the intolerance and seeming excluviseness of straight Chiro has turned me off some. But I also admire the passion in which you believe that you must stand so as not to fall. But straight Chiro is in the minority so alot of mixers say don’t we all have the objective to help people can’t we all just get along. This is all said to give you a perspective from a ‘seeker’ and to also say help I would like to learn more and talk more!
Welcome to the blog Scott and your interest in being a “seeker”. Ask questions, challenge our philosophy and keep an open mind. We are all learning and growing and none of us have arrived. Some have been at it longer than others and are hopefully further along the path. I think that the longer you are into the philosophy, the more comfortable you are with it, the less threatened you feel and as a result the more tolerant of others you are. I am very tolerant of the medical model practitioners. I don’t agree with their model but that is their model. That’s why you will rarely see medical bashing on this blog. But you will not see us trying to copy their model (outside-in) either. We are willing to present our philosophy and allow them to present theirs and let the marketplace decide. That’s what my post was all about. I wish you well in your search and only hope that wherever it takes you, you find joy and fulfillment. We all have the objective of helping people. well perhaps not all but most of us. We believe that in non-therapeutic chiropractic we have a unique and vital way in which to do it and one that needs and deserves to be presented to mankind and we are just fighting for the freedom to do that. Please keep in touch.
Joe…you are correct, the one’s setting policy and working on the destruction of straight chiropractic have no tolerance for us. They see us as a blemish to gaining “cultural acceptance.” FYI, I didn’t post the above statement. Another Steve.
Duh… I finally got the 2 Steves thing. Thanks, but now I have to go back and read every Steve post. Too many Steves, too many Joes, at least we only have 1 Claude (although he posts in 2 languages):)
Merci beaucoup professeur Strauss.
Joe, I think it has mostly to do with what Reggie said a long time ago re: Medicine. (paraphrased) They are adamantly opposed because they believe if we are right, they must be wrong.
Joseph,
I’dsay that you are spot on with this!!!
Joseph and Joe D.,
Don’t you think that it is about having a consistent ethic of life? What I mean is that we are all complicit and benefit from the domination and injustice of “the professional system.” We created a PROFESSION out of the philosophy, art and science of chiropractic and by doing so, we are complicit and enjoying the rewards of the domination and injustice of the game the world’s economic system (Where were your shirts and underwear made?) Usually the only way to be really non-complicit in the system is to choose to live a very simple life. That’s the only way out!
Our american culture is always based on climbing, domination of others, status symbols, power, prestige, and possessions. We are part of a never-ending game that is almost impossible to escape. It has its own inner logic that is self-maintaining, self-perpetuating, and self-congratulating, as well as elitist and exclusionary. It will never create a just or happy profession, yet most chiropractors never call it into question. The question asked from you Joseph is ultimately pointing to this lie that is so well covered up under pretense of public safety. It sounds so noble of them… while the reality resides in their wanting to exterminate the philosophy of chiropractic all together and morphed the profession into an allopathic model that supposedly would give them power, prestige and money. It will never make them happy anyway, because it’s never enough, and they will never completely win.
ADIO Institute is non-existent. Sherman College sold out under pressure from the CCE. Life University is a just that, a university following the criteria of CCE. Even the FSCO removed the only word that gave the organization its distinction of following the principles of chiropractic… yet as I mentioned before, it is not possible to destroy universal laws.
Don’t you see that this is the reality of what happens within the “professional system” ?
Question:
Is chiropractic an alternative form of health?
If so, why?
If not, why not?
Is chiropractic an alternative form of health care?
Is Chiropractic an alternative to health care?
Just wondering Joe, how come you’re running this board on Greenwich time? Prime Meridian?
It just defaulted to GMT when we had it first set up and since the Blog goes around the world, never bothered to change it. You are the firast to mention it. Is it confusing?
Not once I realized what it was. Makes more sense actually.
To comment on the original statement: My understanding of the “old style” was to accept/respect therapeutic practicing Chiropractors even though I wouldn’t accept or respect my doing such things (not necessarily true for me, though I think Reggie was right about why I might do so). Whereas the “new style” can only succeed if there is mutual respect politically, which in the 70’s required the vision, tenacity and hard-headedness of you dinos establishing the FSCO and SCASA. Is it headed that way again? I haven’t been paying much attention the past few years.
Dinos? Us? What does that make Thom and Reggie? Neanderthals? Pre-historic cromagnons? 🙂
Naw, I was referring to JStrauss & Joe D. & that generation as the dinos, to me they were the “Young Bloods” (in my reading of the era) during the Straight Resurrection of the late 60’s & through the 70’s . . . I guess you’d have to put Reggie & Thom in there as Titans. 🙂
By the way, nice website! Good hair too.
Thank you very much Dan for the clarification. 🙂
I think it was naieve on the part of the straights to think that the therapeutic chiropractors would respect their right to go their own way. By starting SCASA it shows we respected their right to go their own way. It was not mutual then and it is foolish to believe they will do it now. Another factor was the belief that the government would accept that idea. Less likely to do that now especially if they truly understood the ADIO philosophy of the straights. I will be posting on this topic tommorrow, stay tuned.