做哲学和“好医生”范式的未来。

IF 3.1 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Faye Tucker
{"title":"做哲学和“好医生”范式的未来。","authors":"Faye Tucker","doi":"10.1007/s11019-025-10294-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The author argues for the substantive doing of philosophy (as opposed to learning about it) as part of medical training. The paper presents a view of medical education as diminishing the critical thinking skills and humanistic values of future clinicians in favour of fact-recall and pattern recognition. This is due to increasingly assessment-driven curriculums and the need to meet extremely high, and rigorous, institutional and industry/sector standards. The author argues that current medical training favours a particular kind of learning, and therefore produces a particular kind of clinician, that may meet these standards and thrive in competitive and high-pressure practice but may not be best for patients. Furthermore, as artificial intelligence (AI) and emerging technologies rapidly change the landscape of medicine, current medical training may also not be best for these clinicians. The 'good doctors' that we are currently training, face a 'survival of the fittest situation' whereby they are no longer able to survive in a changing landscape, and therefore medical education is failing our future 'good doctors'. Changes to the content and delivery of medical education need to happen now to mitigate this failing and give doctors: first, what they need to survive; and second, what they need to properly care for patients in a changing industry, increasingly served by AI. Doing philosophy has the potential to cultivate the thinking skills, inter-personal skills, personal attributes, and humanistic values needed by the 'good doctor' of the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":47449,"journal":{"name":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Doing philosophy and the future of the 'good doctor' paradigm.\",\"authors\":\"Faye Tucker\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11019-025-10294-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The author argues for the substantive doing of philosophy (as opposed to learning about it) as part of medical training. The paper presents a view of medical education as diminishing the critical thinking skills and humanistic values of future clinicians in favour of fact-recall and pattern recognition. This is due to increasingly assessment-driven curriculums and the need to meet extremely high, and rigorous, institutional and industry/sector standards. The author argues that current medical training favours a particular kind of learning, and therefore produces a particular kind of clinician, that may meet these standards and thrive in competitive and high-pressure practice but may not be best for patients. Furthermore, as artificial intelligence (AI) and emerging technologies rapidly change the landscape of medicine, current medical training may also not be best for these clinicians. The 'good doctors' that we are currently training, face a 'survival of the fittest situation' whereby they are no longer able to survive in a changing landscape, and therefore medical education is failing our future 'good doctors'. Changes to the content and delivery of medical education need to happen now to mitigate this failing and give doctors: first, what they need to survive; and second, what they need to properly care for patients in a changing industry, increasingly served by AI. Doing philosophy has the potential to cultivate the thinking skills, inter-personal skills, personal attributes, and humanistic values needed by the 'good doctor' of the future.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47449,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-025-10294-3\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-025-10294-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作者主张将哲学实践(而不是学习哲学)作为医学培训的一部分。本文提出了一种医学教育的观点,认为未来临床医生的批判性思维技能和人文价值在有利于事实回忆和模式识别。这是由于越来越多的以评估为导向的课程,以及需要满足极高、严格的机构和行业/部门标准。提交人认为,目前的医疗培训倾向于一种特定的学习方式,因此产生了一种特定的临床医生,他们可能符合这些标准,并在竞争激烈和高压的实践中茁壮成长,但对患者可能不是最好的。此外,随着人工智能(AI)和新兴技术迅速改变医学格局,目前的医学培训可能也不是这些临床医生的最佳选择。我们目前正在培养的“好医生”面临着“适者生存”的局面,即他们不再能够在不断变化的环境中生存,因此医学教育正在辜负我们未来的“好医生”。现在需要改变医学教育的内容和方式,以减轻这种失败,并给予医生:首先,他们需要生存;其次,在一个不断变化的行业中,他们需要如何正确地照顾病人,而人工智能的服务越来越多。实践哲学有可能培养未来“好医生”所需的思维能力、人际交往能力、个人属性和人文价值观。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Doing philosophy and the future of the 'good doctor' paradigm.

The author argues for the substantive doing of philosophy (as opposed to learning about it) as part of medical training. The paper presents a view of medical education as diminishing the critical thinking skills and humanistic values of future clinicians in favour of fact-recall and pattern recognition. This is due to increasingly assessment-driven curriculums and the need to meet extremely high, and rigorous, institutional and industry/sector standards. The author argues that current medical training favours a particular kind of learning, and therefore produces a particular kind of clinician, that may meet these standards and thrive in competitive and high-pressure practice but may not be best for patients. Furthermore, as artificial intelligence (AI) and emerging technologies rapidly change the landscape of medicine, current medical training may also not be best for these clinicians. The 'good doctors' that we are currently training, face a 'survival of the fittest situation' whereby they are no longer able to survive in a changing landscape, and therefore medical education is failing our future 'good doctors'. Changes to the content and delivery of medical education need to happen now to mitigate this failing and give doctors: first, what they need to survive; and second, what they need to properly care for patients in a changing industry, increasingly served by AI. Doing philosophy has the potential to cultivate the thinking skills, inter-personal skills, personal attributes, and humanistic values needed by the 'good doctor' of the future.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy: A European Journal is the official journal of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Health Care. It provides a forum for international exchange of research data, theories, reports and opinions in bioethics and philosophy of medicine. The journal promotes interdisciplinary studies, and stimulates philosophical analysis centered on a common object of reflection: health care, the human effort to deal with disease, illness, death as well as health, well-being and life. Particular attention is paid to developing contributions from all European countries, and to making accessible scientific work and reports on the practice of health care ethics, from all nations, cultures and language areas in Europe.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信