An Aspect of Epistemology in Medicine: General considerations in Medical Knowledge

Here are three articles from "Philosophy and Medicine" with my annotations in bullet points:

1. Thung, P.J. (1990). The Growth of Medical Knowledge: An Epistemological Exploration.

          In: Ten Have, H.A.M.J., Kimsma, G.K., Spicker, S.F. (eds) The Growth of Medical

          Knowledge. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 36. Springer, Dordrecht.

          https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2025-5_6

• An exposition of natural scientific knowledge and discovery and the status of medicine as natural science. Topics range from what kind of realism scientific knowledge has (Popper's evolutionary theory and Kuhn's structure of scientific revolution describing growth of science as a process wherein theory is matched to nature), the mathematical design of nature Heidegger uses to interpret Kant's mathesis universalis, to the case of medicine on whether it can be considered a natural science and anthropological perspectives on the growth of medical knowledge and its character.

2. Engelhardt, H.T. (1990). Medical Knowledge and Medical Action: Competing Visions. 

          In: Ten Have, H.A.M.J., Kimsma, G.K., Spicker, S.F. (eds) The Growth of Medical

          Knowledge. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 36. Springer, Dordrecht.

          https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2025-5_4

• Examines medicine’s epistemic versus pragmatic aims, linking knowledge to power; critiques Kuhn’s multifaceted “paradigm,” proposes a “vision” framework for knowledge growth, and rejects the myth of the unbiased spectator.

3. Nordenfelt, L. (1990). Comments on Wulff’s, Thung’s and Lindahl’s Essays on the Growth 

          of Medical Knowledge. In: Ten Have, H.A.M.J., Kimsma, G.K., Spicker, S.F. (eds) The

          Growth of Medical Knowledge. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 36. Springer, Dordrecht.

          https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2025-5_8

• Critiques Thung, mapping medicine’s tiers to a science–technology–application model, reevaluating scientific progress, and questioning which aims and values ultimately guide the formation of medical knowledge.