The doctor-patient argumentation: the problem of communication from a rhetorical and bioethical point of view
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Authors
In the era of medical post-paternalism, the doctor-patient communication has been investigated from many different perspectives. In general, however, these researches imply a view of language that is problematic both from a theoretical and bioethical point of view. Starting from this consideration, in the first part of the article we analyze the discursive doctor-patient interaction within the context of philosophy of language, discussing in particular three widespread and false beliefs about communication (language as a tool; the transmission model of communication; prejudice against persuasion). Cleared the field from these prejudices, in the second part two diverse models of argumentation are compared (pragma-dialectics and rhetoric), in favour of an intertwining between rhetoric and bioethics in describing the doctor-patient interaction.
Downloads
Citations
