Abstract
This article explores the profound impact of visualism and visual perception in the context of medical imaging diagnostics. It emphasizes the intricate interplay among vision, embodiment, subjectivity, language, and historicity within the realm of medical science and technology, with a specific focus on image consciousness. The study delves into the role of subjectivity in perception, facilitating the communication of opacity and historicity to the perceiving individual. Additionally, it scrutinizes the image interpretation process, drawing parallels to text interpretation and highlighting the influence of personal biases and individuality in medical practice. By revisiting Husserl’s conceptualization of “image consciousness” and introducing the notion of “image theme”, the paper seeks to establish a theoretical framework for making sense of images within the context of technological interpretation. A key objective is to enhance the phenomenology of technology through a systematic analysis of medical imaging diagnosis, contributing to an expanded epistemological foundation for medical practice. The article recognizes that the construction of medical knowledge incorporates subjective elements, especially within a historical context. The interpretation of images involves both instrumental and expert interpretation, with human subjectivity playing a crucial role. The article asserts that human creativity and conscious engagement are indispensable in interpreting all medical images.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Not applicable.
Notes
In the realm of photography, two distinct effects, denoise and bokeh, are employed to enhance or alter the visual appeal of an image. The denoise effect is applied to mitigate or eliminate noise from a photograph, often manifested as grainy or speckled patterns. Denoising algorithms meticulously analyze the image data, employing various techniques to smoothen out the noise while preserving crucial details. On the other hand, bokeh pertains to the aesthetic quality of the out-of-focus areas in a photograph. The bokeh effect is achieved by deliberately creating a shallow depth of field, ensuring that the main subject of the photograph remains sharp, while the background or foreground intentionally appears blurred.
References
Alweiss, L. 2002. Heidegger and the concept of time. History of the Human Sciences 15: 3.
Anderson, I. 1995. Bodies, Disease and the Problem of Foucault. Int J Anthropol 37: 67–81.
Aristotle. 1984. Complete Works of Aristotle Volume 3. Princeton University Press.
Arnheim, R. 1969. Visual thinking. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Baird, D. 1998. Five theses on Instrumental Realism. PSA, (1): 165–173.
Baykohn, J., and D. Hansen. 2015. Robot Revolution: the coming Robot Age. Machine Industry.
Dennett, D., and M. Kinsbourne. 1992. Time and the observer. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 15: 183–247.
Dreyfus, H. 1987. From Socrates to expert systems: the limits of computational rationality. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 40: 15–31.
Dreyfus, H. 1992. What computers still can’t do: a critique of artistic reason. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dreyfus, H., and P. Rabinow. 2013. Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics – with an afterword by Michel Foucault. New York: Routledge.
Fleck, L. 1981. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Trans. by Bradley F and Trenn T J. University of Chicago Press.
Friis, J., and K B O. 2012. Perception Embodiment and Beyond. Foundations of Science 17: 363–367.
Friis, J., and K B O. 2017. Gestalt descriptions embodiments and medical image interpretation. AI & Society: The Journal of human-centered Systems and Machine Intelligence 32: 209–218.
Friis, J., and K B O. 2020. Enactive Hermeneutics and Smart Medical Technologies. AI and Society
Gadamer, H. S. 1975. Truth and Method. New York: Seabury.
Greene, J. A. 2020. Knowledge in Medias Res: toward a media history of Science, Medicine, and Technology. History and Theory 58: 48–66.
Habermas, J. 1970. Technology and Science as Ideology, in Toward a Rational Society. Trans. by Shapiro J. Boston: Beacon Press.
Hasse, C. 2008. Postphenomenology-learning cultural perception in science. Human Studies, 31(1).
Heidegger, M. 1962. Being and Time. Trans. by Macquarrie J and Robinson E. Blackwell.
Husserl, E. 1970. The Crisis of European sciences and Transcendental phenomenology – an introduction to Phenomenological Philosophy. Trans. by Carr D. Northwestern University.
Husserl, E. 1973. Logical Investigations, trans. by Findlay, J. N. London: Routledge.
Ihde, D. 1979. Technics and Praxis. 69–76. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Ihde, D. 1996. This is not a text or, do we read images? Philosophy Today 40: 1.
Ihde, D. 1998. Expanding hermeneutics: Visualism in Science. Northwestern University.
Ihde, D. 2001. Bodies in Technology. University of Minnesota.
Ihde, D. 2008. Let things speak – post-phenomenology and philosophy of technology. Peking University.
Ihde, D. 2011. Stretching the In-between: Embodiment and Beyond. Foundations of Science 16: 109–118.
Ihde, D. 2016. Sonifying Science: listening to cancer. Nursing Philosophy.
Ihde, D. 2019. Medical techniques. University of Minnesota.
Kelley, M. 2008. Phenomenology and Time-Consciousness, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Knorr-Cetina, K. D. 1999. Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Kuhn, T. 1962. The structure of Scientific revolutions. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
Laverty, S. M. 2003. Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: a comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2: 21–35.
Marr, D. 2001. The philosophy and the approach. In Key readings in cognition: visual perception, ed. S. Yantis. New York: Psychology.
Merleau-Ponty, M. 2012. Phenomenology of Perception, trans. by Donald A. L. New York: Routledge.
Nye, D. 2006. Technology matters: questions to live with. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Rosenberger, R. 2008. Perceiving other planets: bodily experience, interpretation, and the Mars Orbiter Camera. Human Studies 31: 63.
Rosenberger, R. 2012. The Body as Image Interpreter, in: Book Symposium on Don Ihde’s Expanding Hermeneutics: Visualism in Science. Philosophy & Technology, 25:249–270.
Varela, F. J., E. Thompson, and E. Rosch. 1991. The embedded mind: cognitive science and human experience. vol. 9 Cambridge, MA: The MIT.
Verbeek, P. 2005. What things do. 111–113. The Pennsylvania State University.
Zahavi, D., and F. Stjernfelt. eds. 2002. One hundred years of Phenomenology (Husserl’s logical investigations revisited). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Acknowledgements
The authors declare that the submitted work is original and expands considerably (80%) on a previous article in the Chinese language published in the Journal of Dialects of Nature (China), titled “A Tentative Exploration on Medical Visualization Technology and Its Visual Interpretation – Viewpoint from Post-phenomenological Perspective.”
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
RZC contributed to the study conception, design, material preparation, data collection and analysis. RZC wrote the first draft of the manuscript. JKBOF commented and contributed on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Chen, R., Friis, J.K.B.O. Vision, body and interpretation in medical imaging diagnostics. Med Health Care and Philos (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-024-10200-3
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-024-10200-3