King's College London

Research portal

Systematicity, knowledge, and bias. How systematicity made clinical medicine a science

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)863
Number of pages879
JournalSYNTHESE
Volume196
Early online date9 Mar 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Documents

King's Authors

Abstract

This paper shows that the history of clinical medicine in the eighteenth
century supports Paul Hoyningen-Huene’s thesis that there is a correlation between science and systematicity. For example, James Jurin’s assessment of the safety of variolation as a protection against smallpox adopted a systematic approach to the assessment of interventions in order to eliminate sources of cognitive bias that would compromise inquiry. Clinical medicine thereby became a science. I use this confirming instance to motivate a broader hypothesis, that systematicity is a distinctive feature
of science because systematicity is required by processes of knowledge generation that go beyond our everyday cognitive capacities, and these processes are required to produce knowledge of the kinds that science aims at.

Download statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454