Leder D
Department of Philosophy, Loyola College, Baltimore, MD 21210.
Theor Med. 1990 Mar;11(1):9-24. doi: 10.1007/BF00489234.
I argue that clinical medicine can best be understood not as a purified science but as a hermeneutical enterprise: that is, as involved with the interpretation of texts. The literary critic reading a novel, the judge asked to apply a law, must arrive at a coherent reading of their respective texts. Similarly, the physician interprets the 'text' of the ill person: clinical signs and symptoms are read to ferret out their meaning, the underlying disease. However, I suggest that the hermeneutics of medicine is rendered uniquely complex by its wide variety of textual forms. I discuss four in turn: the "experiential text" of illness as lived out by the patient; the "narrative text" constituted during history-taking; the "physical text" of the patient's body as objectively examined; the "instrumental text" constructed by diagnostic technologies. I further suggest that certain flaws in modern medicine arise from its refusal of a hermeneutic self-understanding. In seeking to escape all interpretive subjectivity, medicine has threatened to expunge its primary subject--the living, experiencing patient.
我认为,理解临床医学的最佳方式并非将其视为一门纯粹的科学,而是一项诠释学事业:也就是说,它涉及对文本的解读。文学评论家阅读小说、法官适用法律时,都必须对各自的文本进行连贯的解读。同样,医生解读患者的“文本”:解读临床体征和症状以探寻其意义,即潜在疾病。然而,我认为医学诠释学因其多种文本形式而独具复杂性。我将依次讨论四种文本形式:患者亲身经历的疾病的“体验性文本”;病史采集过程中形成的“叙事性文本”;客观检查时患者身体的“物理性文本”;诊断技术构建的“工具性文本”。我还认为,现代医学的某些缺陷源于其拒绝进行诠释学的自我理解。在试图逃避所有解释性主观性的过程中,医学有可能将其首要主体——活生生的、有体验的患者排除在外。