title: Philosophy of occlusion: past and present.
abstract: Controversy in a field usually stimulates research to find answers and to promote clinical excellence. Thus, differing ideas about occlusion relative to centrics, gnathology, TMD, occlusal adjustment, and periodontal therapy have led to a controversial body of literature; however, I think also it has led to better treatment for patients, regardless of whether, for example, the concept of point centric or freedom-in-centric is advocated. No one can practice dentistry without some concept of occlusion whether it is applied to one or two teeth or to complete mouth restoration. Although the work of committees to clarify terminology is quite appropriate, common usage, semantics, avoidance of confusion in the literature, and the ideological nature of the bias in science must be carefully considered. At times we learn from history that all ideologies need constant revisions; too often the need leads to changes by fiat rather than by virtue of research on problems that may actually exist in communication.
authors.affiliation: Department of Periodontics, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, USA.
authors.forename: M M
authors.initials: MM
authors.lastname: Ash
mesh_terms: D016302:Centric Relation; D003766:Dental Occlusion; D003768:Dental Occlusion, Centric; D003769:Dental Occlusion, Traumatic; D006801:Humans; D010685:Philosophy, Dental; D013705:Temporomandibular Joint Disorders / Q000209:etiology / Q000628:therapy