Pub Date : 2026-01-07DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102114
Pier Luigi Pireddu
This article examines the oceanographic research conducted with the Portuguese vessel Albacora, owned by the Vasco da Gama Aquarium, between 1925 and 1940. During this period, the Albacora completed several expeditions, which are summarized here within an international scientific context. The vessel's contributions are highlighted through an overview of key scientific achievements in the first half of the 20th century, with particular emphasis on the close collaboration between Scandinavian countries and the Portuguese scientific community, led by the pivotal figure Alfredo Magalhães Ramalho. In addition to detailing major Scandinavian expeditions, the article thoroughly explores the Albacora's role in studying the Strait of Gibraltar region. Previously analyzed by Scandinavian researchers, this area received renewed attention through the Albacora's inclusion in an International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) research program. The Strait is presented within an Iberian context, shedding light on debates along the Spain-Portugal axis and illustrating the region's historical significance in advancing knowledge of ocean circulation. Through the Albacora, Portugal became an integral part of an international network dedicated to oceanographic and marine research.
本文考察了1925年至1940年间由葡萄牙船只Albacora进行的海洋学研究，该船归Vasco da Gama水族馆所有。在此期间，Albacora完成了几次探险，在国际科学背景下进行了总结。通过对20世纪上半叶主要科学成就的概述，突出了这艘船的贡献，特别强调了斯堪的纳维亚国家与葡萄牙科学界之间的密切合作，由关键人物阿尔弗雷多·马加尔·赫斯·拉马霍领导。除了详细介绍主要的斯堪的纳维亚探险外，文章还深入探讨了Albacora在研究直布罗陀海峡地区中的作用。此前，斯堪的纳维亚的研究人员对这一地区进行了分析，通过将长鳍鲸纳入国际海洋探索理事会（ICES）的研究计划，该地区重新受到了关注。该海峡在伊比利亚的背景下呈现，揭示了沿着西班牙-葡萄牙轴的辩论，并说明了该地区在推进海洋环流知识方面的历史意义。通过Albacora，葡萄牙成为致力于海洋学和海洋研究的国际网络的组成部分。
{"title":"Iberian Oceanography: The Strait of Gibraltar region and the Portuguese research vessel Albacora in the international scientific framework (1925–1940)","authors":"Pier Luigi Pireddu","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102114","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102114","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article examines the oceanographic research conducted with the Portuguese vessel <em>Albacora</em>, owned by the Vasco da Gama Aquarium, between 1925 and 1940. During this period, the <em>Albacora</em> completed several expeditions, which are summarized here within an international scientific context. The vessel's contributions are highlighted through an overview of key scientific achievements in the first half of the 20th century, with particular emphasis on the close collaboration between Scandinavian countries and the Portuguese scientific community, led by the pivotal figure Alfredo Magalhães Ramalho. In addition to detailing major Scandinavian expeditions, the article thoroughly explores the Albacora's role in studying the Strait of Gibraltar region. Previously analyzed by Scandinavian researchers, this area received renewed attention through the <em>Albacora</em>'s inclusion in an International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) research program. The Strait is presented within an Iberian context, shedding light on debates along the Spain-Portugal axis and illustrating the region's historical significance in advancing knowledge of ocean circulation. Through the <em>Albacora</em>, Portugal became an integral part of an international network dedicated to oceanographic and marine research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102114"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145927345","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-06DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102109
Erman Sözüdoğru
In this paper I focus on the benefits of scientific pluralism in practice. My main motivation is to investigate how do these benefits play out in practice, and how do different systems of knowledge come together to address particular questions? One might accept the epistemic benefits of plurality, yet still deem it undesirable for pragmatic reasons. My argument responds to this objection, which assumes that pragmatic demands can supersede the epistemic benefits of pluralism based on the problems at hand.
I argue that this objection fails because it assumes problems are independent of inquirers. Building on classical pragmatism, I argue that problems are framed by inquirers and cannot be seen as separate from practices. Rather than facing predefined problems, inquirers confront indeterminate situations, requiring judgements on how to formulate the situation. Different framings are possible based on who is involved in making these judgments. A lack of plurality among inquirers leads to frameworks that overlook certain aspects and complexity. Therefore, pluralism is pragmatically beneficial when framing a problem, enabling inquirers to explore various dimensions of complex situations and enrich problem framing.
I illustrate my argument by analysing the early responses to the UK COVID-19 outbreak, showing how the problem was initially framed as biomedical, neglecting social, logistical, and psychological aspects. The lack of plurality in the inquirer community led to shortcomings in the official response. Building on this case, I show that pragmatism demands pluralism when dealing with complex situations, demonstrating that plurality must be promoted in practice, going beyond recognized epistemic benefits.
{"title":"Pragmatic pluralism and problem framing: Why pragmatism demands pluralism","authors":"Erman Sözüdoğru","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102109","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102109","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In this paper I focus on the benefits of scientific pluralism in practice. My main motivation is to investigate how do these benefits play out in practice, and how do different systems of knowledge come together to address particular questions? One might accept the epistemic benefits of plurality, yet still deem it undesirable for pragmatic reasons. My argument responds to this objection, which assumes that pragmatic demands can supersede the epistemic benefits of pluralism based on the problems at hand.</div><div>I argue that this objection fails because it assumes problems are independent of inquirers. Building on classical pragmatism, I argue that problems are framed by inquirers and cannot be seen as separate from practices. Rather than facing predefined problems, inquirers confront indeterminate situations, requiring judgements on how to formulate the situation. Different framings are possible based on who is involved in making these judgments. A lack of plurality among inquirers leads to frameworks that overlook certain aspects and complexity. Therefore, pluralism is pragmatically beneficial when framing a problem, enabling inquirers to explore various dimensions of complex situations and enrich problem framing.</div><div>I illustrate my argument by analysing the early responses to the UK COVID-19 outbreak, showing how the problem was initially framed as biomedical, neglecting social, logistical, and psychological aspects. The lack of plurality in the inquirer community led to shortcomings in the official response. Building on this case, I show that pragmatism demands pluralism when dealing with complex situations, demonstrating that plurality must be promoted in practice, going beyond recognized epistemic benefits.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102109"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145918846","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-06DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102112
Sarah Abel
{"title":"Objectivity and objectification. On the ethics and epistemologies of skin colour measurements in the social sciences","authors":"Sarah Abel","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102112","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102112","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102112"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145918940","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-02DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102108
Benjamin Chin-Yee
Biomarkers are central to the practice of precision oncology, which looks to novel biomarkers to ‘personalize’ cancer care. Philosophers have highlighted epistemic issues surrounding biomarkers but a general account of their role in clinical reasoning is lacking. This article examines biomarker use in clinical reasoning through the lens of abstraction. I propose clinical abstraction as a descriptive and normative account of reasoning with biomarkers that overcomes epistemic and ethical problems raised in the literature.
{"title":"On the uses and abuses of biomarkers in clinical reasoning","authors":"Benjamin Chin-Yee","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102108","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102108","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Biomarkers are central to the practice of precision oncology, which looks to novel biomarkers to ‘personalize’ cancer care. Philosophers have highlighted epistemic issues surrounding biomarkers but a general account of their role in clinical reasoning is lacking. This article examines biomarker use in clinical reasoning through the lens of abstraction. I propose <em>clinical abstraction</em> as a descriptive and normative account of reasoning with biomarkers that overcomes epistemic and ethical problems raised in the literature.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102108"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145884708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102110
Tomasz Kubalica
The article discusses Leon Chwistek's analysis of Nelson's argumentation in light of the theory of the multiplicity of realities and the theory of orders (types). Drawing on these frameworks, Chwistek engages with Nelson's proof of the impossibility of the theory of knowledge (epistemology) grounded in the criterion of truth and argues that the solution to the paradox lies in distinguishing between particular orders (types) of cognition. In conclusion, it should be noted that Chwistek's counterargument does not eliminate regress into infinity but instead assumes that it is inherent in the process of knowledge, since knowledge itself is an infinite process.
{"title":"Leon Chwistek's discussion of Leonard Nelson's proof of the impossibility of the theory of knowledge","authors":"Tomasz Kubalica","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102110","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102110","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The article discusses Leon Chwistek's analysis of Nelson's argumentation in light of the theory of the multiplicity of realities and the theory of orders (types). Drawing on these frameworks, Chwistek engages with Nelson's proof of the impossibility of the theory of knowledge (epistemology) grounded in the criterion of truth and argues that the solution to the paradox lies in distinguishing between particular orders (types) of cognition. In conclusion, it should be noted that Chwistek's counterargument does not eliminate regress into infinity but instead assumes that it is inherent in the process of knowledge, since knowledge itself is an infinite process.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102110"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145885319","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-30DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102105
Chrysi Maria Malouchou Kanellopoulou
William Farr, a renowned nineteenth-century disease theoretician, successfully predicted mortality rates due to cholera in London and Liverpool through the law of elevation, a law inversely correlating mortality from cholera with the elevation of the land. Farr's elevation law and its successful predictions were made within the framework of miasma theory – a theory now considered false, which postulated that diseases, such as cholera, were caught when inhaling toxic odours. Tulodziecki (2021, 2017) points out that Farr's elevation law is a counterexample to selective realism, the position according to which the theoretical elements essentially responsible for the success of a theory are likely to be true. This paper argues that Farr's elevation law was an empirical discovery, essentially independent of the false assumptions of miasma theory, even though the law was considered compatible with these assumptions. Given the empirical nature of Farr's discovery, the success-to-truth inference defended by selective realists does not apply in the first place, and Farr's elevation law is not a counterexample to selective realism.
{"title":"Is Farr's cholera law of elevation a counterexample to selective realism?","authors":"Chrysi Maria Malouchou Kanellopoulou","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102105","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102105","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>William Farr, a renowned nineteenth-century disease theoretician, successfully predicted mortality rates due to cholera in London and Liverpool through the law of elevation, a law inversely correlating mortality from cholera with the elevation of the land. Farr's elevation law and its successful predictions were made within the framework of miasma theory – a theory now considered false, which postulated that diseases, such as cholera, were caught when inhaling toxic odours. Tulodziecki (2021, 2017) points out that Farr's elevation law is a counterexample to selective realism, the position according to which the theoretical elements essentially responsible for the success of a theory are likely to be true. This paper argues that Farr's elevation law was an empirical discovery, essentially independent of the false assumptions of miasma theory, even though the law was considered compatible with these assumptions. Given the empirical nature of Farr's discovery, the success-to-truth inference defended by selective realists does not apply in the first place, and Farr's elevation law is not a counterexample to selective realism.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102105"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145878992","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-24DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102100
Philip Goyal
For a century, quantum theory has posed a fundamental challenge to philosophical thinking. On its face, it repudiates many of the key features of the mechanical conception of physical reality. However, the challenge of developing a precise, coherent alternative to that conception has yet to be met. Here, I argue that a major hindrance to the project of quantum interpretation is its existing interpretative methodologies, which suffer from a lack of systematicity in their judgements about what aspects of the theory are interpretational relevant. In particular, I argue that current interpretations tend to marginalize the informal part of the theory in favour of its formal part, and place inappropriate emphasis on the natural language component of the formalism over its detailed mathematical structure. To counterbalance these biases, I propose that an interpretation-free zone be constructed around the theory, wherein an interpreter initially adopt a descriptive stance which considers all parts of the theory, and that the results of this deliberation (and the judgements about what facts are interpretationally relevant) are reported as part of their interpretation.
I argue that the interpretation of quantum theory poses special challenges and difficulties which necessitate this interpretation-free zone, and that existing interpretative methodologies are insufficient to address them. Further, I argue that a reconstructive interpretative methodology, which harnesses the recent results of the quantum reconstruction program, provides a powerful means to identify almost all facts that could be interpretationally relevant, and naturally meets these challenges and difficulties. Moreover, I argue that the quantum reconstruction program offers a powerful way to discover new physical principles, and offers a systematic pathway to build a rich, coherent conception of quantum reality.
{"title":"Systematizing the interpretation of quantum theory via reconstruction","authors":"Philip Goyal","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102100","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102100","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>For a century, quantum theory has posed a fundamental challenge to philosophical thinking. On its face, it repudiates many of the key features of the mechanical conception of physical reality. However, the challenge of developing a precise, coherent alternative to that conception has yet to be met. Here, I argue that a major hindrance to the project of quantum interpretation is its existing interpretative methodologies, which suffer from a lack of systematicity in their judgements about what aspects of the theory are interpretational relevant. In particular, I argue that current interpretations tend to marginalize the informal part of the theory in favour of its formal part, and place inappropriate emphasis on the natural language component of the formalism over its detailed mathematical structure. To counterbalance these biases, I propose that an interpretation-free zone be constructed around the theory, wherein an interpreter initially adopt a descriptive stance which considers all parts of the theory, and that the results of this deliberation (and the judgements about what facts are interpretationally relevant) are reported as part of their interpretation.</div><div>I argue that the interpretation of quantum theory poses special challenges and difficulties which necessitate this interpretation-free zone, and that existing interpretative methodologies are insufficient to address them. Further, I argue that a reconstructive interpretative methodology, which harnesses the recent results of the quantum reconstruction program, provides a powerful means to identify almost all facts that could be interpretationally relevant, and naturally meets these challenges and difficulties. Moreover, I argue that the quantum reconstruction program offers a powerful way to discover new physical principles, and offers a systematic pathway to build a rich, coherent conception of quantum reality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102100"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145835142","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-24DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102095
Wolf Feuerhahn
The thesis that the humanities and social sciences cannot be reduced to the natural sciences is generally considered to be typically German. This article aims to propose an alternative history of these divisions and debates, and to examine the history of secondary and university institutions in France since the early 19th century. To do this, we propose to mobilize a historical pragmatics attentive to the names of fields of knowledge. What emerges then is the opposition between the sciences and the lettres, which we will show has been a defining feature to this day. Charged with cognitive, moral, and political implications, this opposition has continued to spark controversy. This dualism was instituted by Napoleon following the Concordat signed with the Pope (1801–1802). The aim was to put an end to the Revolution and to give moral issues a central place in school education. This led to the domination of an exceptionalism of the lettres and their primacy in the French academic hierarchy. The article traces the history of this dualism and exceptionalism up to the present day, with a particular focus on the inversion of the hierarchy between sciences and lettres from the 1960s. In general, this article aims to show that questions of divisions between broad areas of knowledge and between disciplines are never purely epistemological issues, but also moral and political ones.
{"title":"“Sciences versus lettres: a state-sanctioned dualism (France, 1808–2020 ?)”","authors":"Wolf Feuerhahn","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102095","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102095","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The thesis that the humanities and social sciences cannot be reduced to the natural sciences is generally considered to be typically German. This article aims to propose an alternative history of these divisions and debates, and to examine the history of secondary and university institutions in France since the early 19th century. To do this, we propose to mobilize a historical pragmatics attentive to the names of fields of knowledge. What emerges then is the opposition between the <em>sciences</em> and the <em>lettres</em>, which we will show has been a defining feature to this day. Charged with cognitive, moral, and political implications, this opposition has continued to spark controversy. This dualism was instituted by Napoleon following the Concordat signed with the Pope (1801–1802). The aim was to put an end to the Revolution and to give moral issues a central place in school education. This led to the domination of an exceptionalism of the <em>lettres</em> and their primacy in the French academic hierarchy. The article traces the history of this dualism and exceptionalism up to the present day, with a particular focus on the inversion of the hierarchy between <em>sciences</em> and <em>lettres</em> from the 1960s. In general, this article aims to show that questions of divisions between broad areas of knowledge and between disciplines are never purely epistemological issues, but also moral and political ones.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102095"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145835148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-22DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102099
Olga Gaidai
In the paper I analyse Danylo Samoylovich's views on the prevention, course and treatment of the plague. In addition to the traditional method of source analysis, I also use other theoretical tools: anthropology of knowledge, theory of modernisation as well as institutionalisation, medicalisation and professionalisation. Both Russian and Ukrainian authors call Samoylovich the father of national epidemiology. There is no doubt that his accomplishments have been exaggerated in Russia and Ukraine, but in no way does this detract from Samoylovich's significance, both in his contributions to theoretical medical thought and to practical preventive and therapeutic measures, especially in epidemiology. Samoylovich was part of the modernisation of the Russian Empire, forced through by Catherine II and her entourage. As someone who served in a variety of roles in anti-plague actions, including quarantine physician and chief physician of plague hospitals, Samoylovich can be regarded as a symbol of the institutionalisation and professionalisation of health care in the Russian Empire. By promoting preventive and therapeutic principles, applying them on a large scale, he contributed significantly to the medicalisation of society.
{"title":"The views of Danylo Samoylovich (1744–1805) on the prevention, course and treatment of the plague","authors":"Olga Gaidai","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102099","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102099","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In the paper I analyse Danylo Samoylovich's views on the prevention, course and treatment of the plague. In addition to the traditional method of source analysis, I also use other theoretical tools: anthropology of knowledge, theory of modernisation as well as institutionalisation, medicalisation and professionalisation. Both Russian and Ukrainian authors call Samoylovich the father of national epidemiology. There is no doubt that his accomplishments have been exaggerated in Russia and Ukraine, but in no way does this detract from Samoylovich's significance, both in his contributions to theoretical medical thought and to practical preventive and therapeutic measures, especially in epidemiology. Samoylovich was part of the modernisation of the Russian Empire, forced through by Catherine II and her entourage. As someone who served in a variety of roles in anti-plague actions, including quarantine physician and chief physician of plague hospitals, Samoylovich can be regarded as a symbol of the institutionalisation and professionalisation of health care in the Russian Empire. By promoting preventive and therapeutic principles, applying them on a large scale, he contributed significantly to the medicalisation of society.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102099"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145821852","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-20DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102098
Adrian Erasmus
Disease classification plays an important role in numerous medical goals, from improving communication between researchers, physicians, and insurers to diagnosis and therapeutic prediction. Therefore, it's important to understand the principles behind our classificatory practices with a view to adopting the approach to disease classification that best serves the practical interests of medical science. In this paper, I discuss three prominent approaches to disease classification: the etiological approach, symptom-based approach, and pathophysiological approach, highlighting strengths and weaknesses of each. My main goal is to defend a pragmatic goal-directed approach to disease classification. I argue that choices about which classificatory approach to use should principally depend on the medical goal being pursued. Drawing from existing pragmatic accounts of classification in science, I suggest that the goal in question determines what kind of information about a disease is important and this, in turn, determines which classificatory approach to apply in service of that goal.
{"title":"A goal-directed approach to disease classification","authors":"Adrian Erasmus","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102098","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102098","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Disease classification plays an important role in numerous medical goals, from improving communication between researchers, physicians, and insurers to diagnosis and therapeutic prediction. Therefore, it's important to understand the principles behind our classificatory practices with a view to adopting the approach to disease classification that best serves the practical interests of medical science. In this paper, I discuss three prominent approaches to disease classification: the etiological approach, symptom-based approach, and pathophysiological approach, highlighting strengths and weaknesses of each. My main goal is to defend a pragmatic goal-directed approach to disease classification. I argue that choices about which classificatory approach to use should principally depend on the medical goal being pursued. Drawing from existing pragmatic accounts of classification in science, I suggest that the goal in question determines what kind of information about a disease is important and this, in turn, determines which classificatory approach to apply in service of that goal.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102098"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145806311","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号