Critically Appraising Pragmatist Critiques of Evidence-Based Medicine: Is EBM Defensible on Pragmatist Grounds?

Significant contributions to debates in the philosophy of evidence-based medicine (EBM) have come from a variety of different philosophical quarters, yet mainstream discourse in the field has been largely devoid of contributions from scholars working in the pragmatist tradition. This is a particularly conspicuous omission, given pragmatism's commitment to the melioristic view that philosophy both can, and should, be about the business of concretely bettering the human estate. Two exceptions to this oversight come from Brian Walsh and Maya Goldenberg. Unfortunately, in both cases, the misapplication of pragmatist thinking leads to the mistaken view that EBM is committed to some form of pernicious objectivism. This article aims to revise these pragmatist critiques in order to bring them more consistently in line with pragmatist values and commitments. Doing so shows that EBM is defensible on pragmatist grounds against objectivist attacks. © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Citation

S Joshua Thomas. Critically Appraising Pragmatist Critiques of Evidence-Based Medicine: Is EBM Defensible on Pragmatist Grounds? The Journal of medicine and philosophy. 2023 Feb 17;48(1):73-83

Mesh Tags

PMID: 36519764

search → result