[et_pb_section bb_built=”1″][et_pb_row][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text]
For anyone who does not know what the three-legged stool is I will quickly explain it. In our education at Sherman, we are taught to look at Chiropractic with the mindset of three factors being extremely important in the practice of Chiropractic. The three components include science, art, and philosophy. Yet, which one is the most important? Something similar to this came up in one of my classes and got me thinking. Do you need all three or can one be left out?
In my personal opinion, I believe that you need all three. Without one, you are missing a crucial characteristic of Chiropractic. You need to have science in order to justify what you are doing and understand that what you do works (it helps when you have the science to back it up). You also need to have a philosophy in order to know that not only do you need to adjust someone but why you are adjusting to a certain place (focus and drive on subluxation). Finally, one needs to have an art in order to be different. So to me, it makes sense that all three are extremely important, and you cannot have one without the other. Yet, if someone did not have the same education as Sherman what do they believe? Can Chiropractic as a profession continue to survive without all three of these actively present? WHAT DO YOU THINK??
[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]
