Objectivity, Scientificity, and the Dualist Epistemology of Medicine

10Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This paper considers the view that medicine is both “science” and “art.” It is argued that on this view certain clinical knowledge – of patients’ histories, values, and preferences, and how to integrate them in decision-making – cannot be scientific knowledge. However, by drawing on recent work in philosophy of science it is argued that progress in gaining such knowledge has been achieved by the accumulation of what should be understood as “scientific” knowledge. I claim there are varying degrees of objectivity pertaining to various aspects of clinical medicine. Hence, what is often understood as constituting the “art” of medicine is amenable to objective methods of inquiry, and so, may be understood as “science”. As a result, I conclude that rather than endorse the popular philosophical distinction between the art and science of medicine, in the future a unified, multifaceted epistemology of medicine should be developed to replace it.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cunningham, T. V. (2015). Objectivity, Scientificity, and the Dualist Epistemology of Medicine. In History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences (Vol. 7, pp. 1–17). Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8887-8_1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free