Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Consensus about consensus?

  • Subject: Re: Consensus about consensus?
  • From: "Lance" <lachenicht@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: 15 May 2006 13:28:55 -0700
  • Complaints-to: groups-abuse@google.com
  • In-reply-to: <1264484.Nj4h2hSZPV@schestowitz.com>
  • Injection-info: j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=; posting-account=Wffh9A0AAAAjqbqrEFEPvHI99Rl6RKaH
  • Newsgroups: uk.philosophy.humanism
  • Organization: http://groups.google.com
  • References: <1147261599.844411.274200@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1264484.Nj4h2hSZPV@schestowitz.com>
  • User-agent: G2/0.2
  • Xref: news.mcc.ac.uk uk.philosophy.humanism:47069
Roy wrote:

"Expertise,  after many years of practice, is often judged and measures
familiarity  with the written 'facts'. In the case of the medical
there  are  some immutable truths. There are not always blacks  and
however.  Even when it comes to the diagnosis, don't neglect the fact
probability  is  involved  (you  could  take this  further  to  realms
dicussions on causality). So, the doctor, as in your example, might
face a
situation  wherein  the  patience  plays  a role  in  correctness  of


Sorry about the delay in replying. I have been both busy and far from

I agree that every patient is different. For example, in key hole
surgery a major problem is that many patients are anatomicaly
different. Then expertise depends on the surgeons "comfort level" - his
willingness to say, I can't carry on on these circumstances but must
"open up" the patient. That ability to judge their own competence is a
kind of expertise...


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index