| Title |
The nature of epistemic virtues in the practice of medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11019-014-9567-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shahram Ahmadi Nasab Emran |
| Abstract |
There is an assumption in virtue epistemology that epistemic virtues are the same in different times and places. In this paper, however, I examine this assumption in the practice of medicine as a paradigm example. I identify two different paradigms of medical practice, one before and the other after the rise of bioethics in 1960s. I discuss the socially defined role and function of physicians and the epistemic goals of medical practice in these two periods to see how these elements affect the necessary epistemic virtues for physicians. I conclude that epistemic virtues of medical practice differ in these two periods according to the differing epistemic goals and the socially defined function of physicians. In the end, I respond to the possible objections to my thesis based on the distinction between skill and virtue. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 20% |
| Professor | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Philosophy | 3 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 30% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 10% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 January 2015.
All research outputs
#15,300,431
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#375
of 590 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,884
of 227,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 590 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,403 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.