Robot decisions: on the importance of virtuous judgment in clinical decision making
Article first published online: 11 AUG 2011
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Special Issue: Philosophy of Evidence Based Medicine
Volume 17, Issue 5, pages 883–887, October 2011
How to Cite
Gelhaus, P. (2011), Robot decisions: on the importance of virtuous judgment in clinical decision making. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17: 883–887. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01720.x
- Issue published online: 23 SEP 2011
- Article first published online: 11 AUG 2011
- Accepted for publication: 14 June 2011
- clinical judgment;
- medical education;
- moral emotions;
- moral motivation;
- virtue ethics
Rationale, aims and objectives The aim of this article is to argue for the necessity of emotional professional virtues in the understanding of good clinical practice. This understanding is required for a proper balance of capacities in medical education and further education of physicians. For this reason an ideal physician, incarnating the required virtues, skills and knowledge is compared with a non-emotional robot that is bound to moral rules. This fictive confrontation is meant to clarify why certain demands on the personality of the physician are justified, in addition to a rule- and principle-based moral orientation and biomedical knowledge and skills.
Methods Philosophical analysis of thought experiments inspired by science fiction literature by Isaac Asimov.
Results Although prima facie a rule-oriented robot seems more reliable and trustworthy, the complexity of clinical judgment is not met by an encompassing and never contradictory set of rules from which one could logically derive decisions. There are different ways how the robot could still work, but at the cost of the predictability of its behaviour and its moral orientation. In comparison, a virtuous human doctor who is also bound to these rules, although less strictly, will more reliably keep at moral objectives, be understandable, be more flexible in case the rules come to their limits, and will be more predictable in these critical situations. Apart from these advantages of the virtuous human doctor referring to her own person, the most problematic deficit of the robot is its lacking deeper understanding of the inner mental events of patients which makes good contact, good communication and good influence impossible.
Conclusion Although an infallibly rule-oriented robot seems more reliable at first view, in situations that require complex decisions like clinical practice the agency of a moral human person is more trustworthy. Furthermore, the understanding of the patient's emotions must remain insufficient for a non-emotional, non-human being. Because these are crucial preconditions for good clinical practice, enough attention should be given to develop these virtues and emotional skills, in addition to the usual attention on knowledge, technical skills and the obedience to moral rules and principles.