Anna Malitowska

Breast ultrasound is a key diagnostic method for breast cancer and relies heavily on the interpretation of visual cues. At the same time, medical education is increasingly being driven by time constraints, which favors rapid pattern recognition, limiting the scope for reflective image analysis and the diagnostic process. Therefore, the aim of this study was to propose and evaluate an artistic and pedagogical teaching model, inspired by the interpretive practices of Italian High Renaissance painting, as a tool to support the development of diagnostic reasoning in breast ultrasound. This model focuses on careful observation, analysis of the relationship between detail and the overall image, and the conscious transformation of visual cues into clinical meaning. This study was conducted during the four-day ARSA Think Tank Meeting (ARSATTM). Medical students worked in four groups; two groups received methodological training based on visual cue analysis, and two did not. All groups performed identical tasks involving the interpretation of breast ultrasound images and ultrasound examinations on real patients. The results indicate that an artistic–pedagogical teaching model to promote more coherent and reflective diagnostic reasoning in breast ultrasound is feasible. Therefore, integrating this approach may be a valuable addition to medical students’ ultrasound education in the realities of limited clinical time.

Medicine is struggling with the constantly rising incidence of breast cancer. The key to this fight is to be able to speed up diagnosis, as rapid diagnosis reduces the number of aggressive or advanced cases. For this process to be effective, it is necessary to have the right attitude toward diagnosis as a research practice. Our critical analysis of diagnosis, as a methodology of medical science, reflects on it as a research practice that is regulated in a socio-subjective way by a methodological culture. This position allows us to contrast critical methodological culture with the habitual–practical, or methodical, culture of practicing diagnosis. We point to the interpretative status of medical analyses performed by medical historians by referring to Italian Renaissance paintings and historical–artistic interpretations. In this field, analyzing disputes between researchers as a clash of methodologies in the ways interpretation transforms signs into meaning is a critical methodological reflection. Medicine is a diverse scientific discourse with a paradigmatic structure in which new ways of conducting diagnostic tests may appear. It is only possible to see this from the methodological level. In addition, passive respect for existing patterns of conduct hinders an exchange of views between researchers, which limits the possibility of correcting research procedures. The ultimate consequence of such passivity is an inability to improve diagnosis, which, in turn, harms the interests of patients. In this regard, it is worth remembering that the paramount objective of diagnosis is not the disease, but the patient.

Medicine is struggling with the constantly rising incidence of breast cancer. The key in this fight is to be able to speed up diagnosis, as rapid diagnosis reduces the number of aggressive or advanced cases. For this process to be effective, it is necessary to have the right attitude towards diagnosis as a research practice. Our critical analysis of diagnosis, as a methodology of medical science, reflects on it as a research practice that is regulated in a socio-subjective way by a methodological culture. This position allows us to contrast critical methodological culture with the habitual-practical, or methodical, culture of practising diagnosis. We point to the interpretative status of medical analyses performed by medical historians by referring to Italian Renaissance painting and historical-artistic interpretations. In this field, analysing disputes between researchers as a clash of methodologies in the ways interpretation transforms signs into meanings, is a critical methodological reflection. Medicine is a diverse scientific discourse with a paradigmatic structure in which new ways of conducting diagnostic tests may appear. It is only possible to see this from the methodological level. In addition, passive respect for existing patterns of conduct hinders an exchange of views between researchers, what limits the possibility of correcting research procedures. The ultimate consequence of such passivity is an inabili/ty to improve diagnosis, which in turn, harms the interests of patients. In this regard, it is worth remembering that the paramount objective of diagnosis is not the disease, but the patient.

The article addresses the issue of cultural determinants of the interpretation of breast cancer representations present in Renaissance art. Interpretation is understood in terms of semiotics as an operation of transforming sign structures guided by the specifics of the problem situation the interpreter finds himself in. Interpretation is thus determined by its objective and presupposed knowledge relevant to achieving it. Taking the above into account, the text considers two types of interpretation (along with their cultural determinants) of artistic representations of breasts present in Renaissance art. First, selected diagnostic interpretations of specific works of art taken from medical literature are reconstructed. Secondly, interpretations of these works are presented based on issues relevant to the history of art and cultural theory. The concluding part raises the issue of the opaqueness of the cultural determinants of self-diagnosis recommended as a form of secondary prevention of breast cancer.

This paper addresses the problem of validity and justification of historical science in Johann Gustav Droysen’s “Outline of History” firstly published in 1858. Authors convince that Droysen has anticipated Dilthey’s concept of the critique of historical reason. Firstly, Droysen’s position is defined in terms of empiricism, which assumes that historical material is an expression of inner experiences. Secondly, the understanding of such expressions is understood as possible due to “moral commonalities” which represent a body of knowledge shared among representatives 56 of particular historical communities. It is also argued that such “common knowledge” is embedded in systems of norms like morality, custom, and law. Finally, the authors posit that the grounds for scientific study of history can found in Kantian concept of “transcendental freedom” that implies that human existence is not only subjected to causal laws but also to norms in a sense of morality. The latter understanding explains in what sense perceivable phenomena may be interpreted as expressions of meaningful agency, which paves the way for Droysen’s theory of interpretivehistorical studies.

The paper provides introductory remarks to the special issue of Public Philosophy and Democratic Education dedicated to the role of participatory methods in contemporary informational society. The authors posit that in relation to classical definitions of knowledge economy, which treat knowledge as a fundamental factor of production leading to innovations in products and services, one can also acknowledge the democratizing of the innovation (technical, social, or institutional) due to increased participation of society in the process. The authors refer to information technologies which enable citizens’ participation in urban governance. They also emphasize the role of participatory-foresight methods in creating public policy based on long-term citizens-driven visions of social and economic development.