Skip to main content

The legitimacy of clinical knowledge: Towards a medical epistemology embracing the art of medicine

Abstract

The traditional medical epistemology, resting on a biomedical paradigmatic monopoly, fails to display an adequate representation of medical knowledge. Clinical knowledge, including the complexities of human interaction, is not available for inquiry by means of biomedical approaches, and consequently is denied legitimacy within a scientific context. A gap results between medical research and clinical practice. Theories of knowledge, especially the concept of tacit knowing, seem suitable for description and discussion of clinical knowledge, commonly denoted “the art of medicine.” A metaposition allows for inquiry of clinical knowledge, inviting an expansion of the traditional medical epistemology, provided that relevant criteria for scientific knowledge within this field are developed and applied. The consequences of such approaches are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    Sassower R, Grodin MA. Scientific uncertainty and medical responsibility.Theoretical Medicine 1987;8:221–234.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    McWhinney IR. Are we on the brink of a major transformation of clinical method?CMAJ 1986;135:873–878.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DC.A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. Towards a Philosophy and Ethic of the Health Profession. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Foss L. The challenge to biomedicine: A foundations perspective.J Medicine and Philosophy 1989;14:165–191.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Malterud K. Women's undefined disorders — A challenge for clinical communication.Family Practice 1992;9:299–303.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Malterud K.Allmennpraktikerens møte med kvinnelige pasienter (The Encounter between the General Practitioner and the Female Patients (In Norwegian, English summary). Thesis. Oslo: TANO, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Malterud K. Key questions — a strategy for modifying clinical communication. Transforming tacit skills into a clinical method.Scand J Prim Health Care 1994;12:121–127.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Gorovitz S, MacIntyre A. Toward a theory of medical fallibility.J Medicine and Philosophy 1976;1:51–71.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Sassower and Grodin, 1987

  13. 13.

    Latour B, Woolgar S.Laboratory Life. The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986 (first edition 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Foss, 1989.

  15. 15.

    Pellegrino, 1981.

  16. 16.

    Munson R. Why medicine cannot be a science.J Medicine and Philosophy 1981;6:183–208.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Wulff HR. Rational diagnosis and treatment.J Medicine and Philosophy 1986;11:123–124.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Schön DA.The Reflective Practitioner. How Professionals Think in Action. London: Avebury, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Stein HF. The role of some nonbiomedical parameters in clinical decision-making: An ethnographic approach.Qualitative Health Research 1991;1:6–26.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    McGuire CH. Medical problem-solving: A critique of the literature.J Med Educ 1985;60:587–595.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases.Science 1974;185:1124–1131.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Detmer DE, Fryback DG, Gassner K. Heuristics and biases in medical decision-making.J Med Educ 1978;53:682–683.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Stein, 1991.

  25. 25.

    Ibid.

  26. 26.

    Pellegrino, 1981.

  27. 27.

    McWhinney IR. “An acquaintance with particulars ...”Family Medicine 1989;21:296–298.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    McWhinney IR. Medical knowledge and the rise of technology.J Medicine and Philosophy 1978;3:293–304.

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Hunter KM.Doctor's Stories. The Narrative Structure of Medical Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Polanyi M.The Tacit Dimension. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Johannessen KS. Rule following intransitive understanding, and tacit knowledge. An understanding of the Wittgensteinian concept of practice as regards tacit knowing. In Høibraaten H, ed.Essays in Pragmatic Philosophy. Oslo: Norwegian University Press, 1990;101–127.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Schön, 1991.

  33. 33.

    Dreyfus HL, Dreyfus SE. Putting computers in their place.Social Research 1986;53:57–76.

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Balint M.The Doctor, His Patient and the Illness. London: Pitman Medical, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Budd MA, Zimmerman ME. The potentiating clinician: Combining scientific and linguistic competence.Advances 1986;3:40–55.

    Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Helman C. The role of context in primary care.J Royal Coll Gen Pract 1984;34:547–550.

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Hunter, 1991.

  38. 38.

    Gross R, Lorenz W. Intuition in surgery as a strategy of medical decision-making: Its potency and limitations.Theor Surg 1990;5:54–59.

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Feinstein AR. An analysis of diagnsotic reasoning, II. The strategy of intermediate decisions.Yale J Biol Med 1973;46:264–283.

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Albert DA, Munson R, Resnik MD.Reasoning in Medicine. An Introduction to Clinical Inference. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Wulff, 1986.

  42. 42.

    Ibid.

  43. 43.

    Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DC.For the Patient's Good. The Restoration of Beneficence in Health Care. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Gorovitz and MacIntyre, 1976.

  45. 45.

    McWhinney, 1989.

  46. 46.

    Widdershoven-Heerding I. Medicine as a form of practical understanding.Theoretical Medicine 1987;8:179–185.

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Foss, 1989.

  48. 48.

    Pellegrino ED. Philosophy of medicine: Problematic and potential.J Medicine and Philosophy 1976;1:5–31.

    Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Pellegrino, 1981.

  50. 50.

    Pellegrino, 1988.

  51. 51.

    Munson, 1981.

  52. 52.

    Gorovitz and MacIntyre, 1976.

  53. 53.

    Kuhn TS.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Polkinghorne DE. Postmodern epistemology of practice. In Kvale S, ed.Psychology and Postmodernism. London: Sage, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Polkinghorne D.Methodology for the Human Sciences. Systems of Inquiry. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Pellegrino, 1981.

  57. 57.

    Gorovitz and MacIntyre, 1976.

  58. 58.

    Gatens-Robinson E. Clinical judgment and the rationality of the human sciences.J Medicine and Philosophy 1986;11:167–178.

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Johannessen KS. The concept of practice in Wittgenstein's later philosophy.Inquiry 1988;31:357–369.

    Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Schön, 1991.

  62. 62.

    Polkinghorne, 1992.

  63. 63.

    Schön, 1991.

  64. 64.

    Kvale S. To validate is to question. In Kvale S, ed.Issues of Validity in Qualitative Research. Lund: Studentlitteratur, 1989:73–92.

    Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Keller EF.Reflections on Gender and Science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Malterud, 1990.

  67. 67.

    Malterud, 1994.

  68. 68.

    Kvale, 1989.

  69. 69.

    Polkinghorne, 1992.

  70. 70.

    Stein, 1991.

  71. 71.

    McWhinney, 1986.

  72. 72.

    McWhinney, 1989.

  73. 73.

    Pellegrino, 1988.

  74. 74.

    Polanyi, 1983.

  75. 75.

    Gorovitz and MacIntyre, 1976.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Malterud, K. The legitimacy of clinical knowledge: Towards a medical epistemology embracing the art of medicine. Theoretical Medicine 16, 183–198 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00998544

Download citation

Key words

  • clinical knowledge
  • epistemology
  • scientific knowledge
  • art of medicine
  • tacit knowing
  • validity criteria