Skip to main content
Log in

Touch and technology: Two paradigms of patient care

  • Published:
Journal of Religion and Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Technology violates human dignity only to the extent that its use reduces persons to the moral status of objects. The prevalence of technology in health care is an extension of the scientific paradigm, in which the body is reduced to an object void of subjectivity. The empathie paradigm, in contrast, is based upon the moral primacy of subjectivity. Empathic touch-as distinct from instrumental and philanthropic touch-establishes a clinical relation of intersubjectivity, affirming in patients the dignity and worth that morally distinguish persons from objects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Reiser, S. J.,Medicine and the Reign of Technology. London, Cambridge University Press. 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  2. See Bursztajn, H.,et al..Medical Choices, Medical Chances. New York, Delacorte Press, 1981. for a comparison of two scientific paradigms, the mechanistic and the probabilistic, in their application to medicine.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Churchill, J., “Gods. Frogs, and Sojourns.”Soundings. 1982,65, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Remen. N.,The Human Patient. Garden City, New York, Anchor Press, 1980, for a description of imagery and visualization techniques in general medical practice.

    Google Scholar 

  5. For a discussion of aesthetic meanings of the body as subject, see Gadow. S., “Body and Self: A Dialectic,”,J. Medicine and Philosophy, 1980,5, 3, 172–185.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wyshcogrod, E., “Empathy and Sympathy as Tactile Encounter,”J. Medicine and Philosophy. 1981,6. 1, 25–43.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wilbur. R., “Advice to a Prophet.” InThe Poems of Richard Wilbur. New York, Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Auden, W. H., “Surgical Ward.” In Cousins, N., ed..The Physician in Literature. Philadelphia, W. B. Saunders Co., 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  9. May, W.F., “Who Cares for the Elderly?”Hastings Center Report. 1982,12, 6, 31–37.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Blythe, R.,The View in Winter. New York, Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. Inc., 1979, p. 82.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Buber, M.,Between Man and Man. New York, The Macmillan Co., 1966.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Additional information

An earlier version of this paper was presented to the 15th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Nursing Service Administrators of the American Hospital Association; San Diego. California, October 27–29, 1982.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gadow, S. Touch and technology: Two paradigms of patient care. J Relig Health 23, 63–69 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999900

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999900

Keywords

Navigation