From Popperian science to normal science. Commentary on Sestini (2009) 'Epistemology and ethics of evidence-based medicine'.

摘要

In 'Epistemology and ethics of evidence-based medicine: Putting goal-setting in the right place', Piersante Sestini argues that evidence-based medicine (EBM) is highly consistent with Karl Popper's philosophy of science, which famously demarcated science by the falsiflability criterion and highlighted for generations of scientists the inherent fallibility of scientific claims. In this commentary, I will demonstrate, contra Sestini, that Popper and EBM share only superficial similarity. Furthermore, Sestini's focus on the centrality that formulating the clinical question plays in evidence-based practice instead highlights EBM's compatibility with the Kuhnian picture of 'normal science'.