Directions in biomedical research: a plea for ideological pluralism

Area of Science:

• Medical Science
• Philosophy of Science
• History of Medicine

Background:

• Critique of current medical science's imbalance between basic and pathophysiological research.
• Historical context of adopting a physics framework in physiology, influenced by Cartesian metaphysics.
• Feinstein's argument on the diminished status of 'small research' compared to 'large research'.

Observation:

• The overemphasis on basic science has eroded the connection between clinical practice and fundamental research.
• The adoption of an absolutist, Cartesian 'Prime Mover' metaphysical framework in biology, unlike physics, has perpetuated this imbalance.
• Funding bodies' preferential status for 'large research' over 'small research' exacerbates the issue.

Findings:

• A 'drastic reorientation' is needed to correct the imbalance in medical science.
• Replacing biological absolutism with a relativist framework is essential for restoring balance.
• Reinstating living matter's status as both cause and effect will naturally lead to redress.

Implications:

• A non-metaphysical biological perspective, embracing pluralism, can restore equilibrium between large-scale and small-scale investigations.
• This shift will enhance the integration of bedside observations with bench research.
• It advocates for a scientific framework where no perspective is considered inferior.