title: Human all too human reasoning: comparing clinical and phenomenological intuition.
abstract: This paper compares clinical intuition and phenomenological intuition. I begin with a brief analysis of Husserl's conception of intuition. Second, I review the attitude toward clinical intuition by physicians and philosophers. Third, I discuss the Aristotelian conception of intellectual intuition or nous and its relation to phronesis. Phronesis provides a philosophical ground for clinical intuition by linking medicine as both a techné and praxis. Considering medicine as a techné, Pellegrino and Thomasma exclude clinical intuitions from their philosophy of medicine. However, in modeling clinical reasoning on phronesis, they link Aristotelian nous with clinical reasoning. While supporting the application of phronesis to clinical reasoning, I consider Pellegrino and Thomasma's model deficient for eliminating intuition as an inalienable element of clinical reasoning. Rather, clinical intuitions are necessary in linking medicine as both art and practice. This becomes more obvious through the phenomenological analysis of clinical intuitions. Clinical reasoning and phenomenological intuitions are similar in joining the perceptual and intellectual aspects of human judgment. Furthermore, clinical intuitions can be extended to become phenomenological intuitions through phenomenological reflection. Clinical intuitions may be examined phenomenologically for their originary foundations. In this way, medicine acts as a phenomenological clue. Phenomenology provides a method to restore the Hippocratic synthesis of empirical observation and wholism associated with clinical intuitions.
authors: McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. hillel.braude@mcgill.ca
authors: Hillel D
authors: HD
authors: Braude
mesh_terms: D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D006801:Humans; D019545:Intuition; D007600:Judgment; D009014:Morals; D010686:Philosophy, Medical; D010820:Physicians / Q000523:psychology