Reply to comment

 “ So perhaps we should trust scientists less because of training/expertise/membership and more for their skepticism, their ability to entertain the possibility of thinking about things in a variety of different ways, includincieg ways quite different from the norm? “ (Prof Grobstein) 

I think this is an interesting question to think about. If someone were to ask me why I am going to a doctor’s appointment when I have a cold, my answer would probably be “to get medicine” or more simply “to make me better”. So, for more simple medical matters, it seems entirely appropriate that we rely on the expertise of medical professionals that they have acquired through training and regular practice. However, through a few summer internships I have had that involved shadowing physicians, it became apparent that medicine is often about thinking outside of the box and getting creative with things. Sure, patients sometimes present with a “textbook” example of disease X, but more often than not, there might be something that makes the disease a little more complicated, therefore rendering the need for a more specialized, less “run-of-the mill” treatment plan. Without skepticism, adaptability and creativity, doctors would not be able to handle such situations adeptly and return the most favorable results.

I think it is interesting to relate this back to our discussion of “scientific method and the crack”. We established in class that there can never be any definitive conclusion in science because of the cyclic nature of scientific inquiry (at least…that’s how I understood that part of the discussion: feel free to correct me if I’m wrong). The “crack” allows for infinite solutions to the same question. I think this translates up to the field of medicine with regards to the skepticism, adaptability and creativity mentioned before that I believe is so crucial to being a good physician. So, I think that the crack is one of the most important components of science. Without it, we might struggle to be innovative and unable to present new understandings of the same old situation. Even though i find it frustrating that answers are infinite, it is clearly helpful to the development of science and medicine.