Advertisement

Theoretical Medicine

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 325–331 | Cite as

On the dearth of philosophical contributions to medicine

  • Mark Yarborough
Special Aritcles

Abstract

A recent editorial in this journal calls for more philosophical work in the areas of philosophy of medical science and research methodology [1]. The purpose of the present paper is to bring to light and discuss some obstacles and opportunities for development in these areas. In section I, barriers to increased philosophical work in medicine outside ethics are discussed. In sections II and III, additional areas in medicine ripe for philosophical work are identified and discussed: (a) improving the epistemic fitness of much current clinical reasoning, (b) defining the conditions under which greater epistemic fitness can be achieved, and (c) technology assessment.

Key words

clinical reasoning epistemic fitness ethics philosophy of science research methodology technology assessment 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lindahl BIB. Editorial. Theor Med 1990;11:1–3.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brody BA. The Baylor experience in teaching medical ethics. Acad Med 1989;64:713–7.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Walker RM, Lane LW, Siegler M. Development of a teaching program in clinical medical ethics at the University of Chicago. Acad Med 1989;64:723–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kopelman LM. Development of the medical humanities program at East Carolina University. Acad Med 1989;64:730–4.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thomasma DC, Marshall P. The clinical medical humanities program at Loyola University of Chicago. Acad Med 1989;64:735–9.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bresnahan JF, Hunter KM. Ethics education at Northwestern University Medical School. Acad Med 1989;64:740–3.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jonsen AR. Medical ethics teaching programs of the University of California, San Francisco, and the University of Washington. Acad Med 1989;64:718–22.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barnard D, Clouser KD. Teaching medical ethics in its contexts: Penn State College of Medicine. Acad Med 1989;64:744–6.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Frader J, Arnold R, Coulehan J. Evolution of clinical ethics teaching at the University of Pittsburgh. Acad Med 1989;64:747–50.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wartman SA, Brock DW. The development of medical ethics curriculum in a general internal medicine residency program. Acad Med 1989;64:751–4.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burnum JF, Medical practice a la mode: how medical fashions determine medical care. N Eng J Med 1987;317:1220–2.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eddy DM, Billings J. The quality of medical evidence: implications for quality of care. Health Aff 1988;7:19–32.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DC. For the Patient's Good: The Restoration of Beneficence in Health Care. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Perry S. Technology assessment, continuing uncertainty. N Eng J Med 1986;314:240–3.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Petitti DB. Competing technologies, implications for the costs and complexity of medical care. N Eng J Med 1986; 315:1480–3.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Buchanan A. Health-care delivery and resource allocation. In: Veatch RM, ed. Medical Ethics. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 1989:291–327.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Emery DD, Schneiderman LJ. Cost-effectiveness analysis in health care. Hastings Cent Rep 1989;(July/Aug):8–13.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weinstein MC. Challenges for cost-effectiveness research. Med Decis Making 1986;6:194–8.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DC. A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice: Toward a Philosophy and Ethic of the Healing Professions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Yarborough
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyThe University of Colorado at DenverDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations