A rather interesting aspect of the value of the middle ground between medicine and natural philosophy is discussed in an editorial in the Lancet for October 30. It is prompted by the reflection that public trust in doctors waxes and wanes, and presently appears to be on the downward path.
The editorial has recourse to a lecture given in 1931 to the Cambridge University Medical Society by the physician John Ryle. In it Ryle observes wisely that a doctor is a student of nature, or should be, and that "the naturalistic temperament and the physicianly temperament are, as we should imagine, close relatives, if not identical twins."
Today there is enormous pressure on medical teaching to concentrate on concepts such as molecular pathology end the brute value of evidence, with the result that doctors ignore the many other less precise factors associated with disease and its management, and overlook the fact that experiment based on direct observation in individual cases is an essential aspect of doctoring.
Quick perception, memory and the application of past experience to the current situation are important in dealing successfully with a patient and earning his or her confidence. A wider understanding of human types and reactions, and the ability to judge divergences from the normal and the average, with appreciation of the wide variations presented by an individual case, are part of a good doctor's equipment. If he or she comes to recognise the need for a more holistic approach and a wider philosophical basis for handling the sick, the medical profession may yet be restored to the high esteem it once enjoyed. The principle applies, of course, to all walks of life. The real purpose of education is to produce a fully aware and balanced individual. The sooner we abandon the trend to specialise at the expense of a wider view of life because it brings quicker profits in a cut-throat world, the sooner we shall find ourselves at one with our universe and a blessing to our fellow humans.