Search results

The development of new biomedical technologies has contributed to changing, blurring the boundaries between the norm and pathology of a human being. It is about a gap in the notions of norm and pathology, illness and treatment that are accepted in scientific communities. As a framework of the emerging humanistic scientific paradigm the principles of a subject-oriented approach to the patient are being developed, aimed at maintaining the patient's control over the recovery process, at developing his/her subject position, which implies his/her active and responsible participation in the treatment process and in medical decision-making. Formation of the considered approach in medical institutions is connected with the development of new institutions and practices. The author shows that the procedural model of the institute of medical cases ethical expertise is aimed at developing a subject-oriented approach in clinical practice. At the same time, the patient, as a participant of ethical expertise, acquires the experience of reflexive reasoning and, thus, enabling the possibility and capability for a patient to be involved in the process of treatment management on a new basis. The article presents some results of the author's study of the procedural model of ethical expertise in German medical settings in the context of describing the main gaps and problems associated with the implementation of the subject-oriented approach. The research was conducted using the methods of semi- formalized interview, substantial analysis of research and methodological literature. As the study has shown, the main problems of the subject-oriented approach implementation in the practice of ethical expertise are related to the trends of bureaucratization and commercialization of this practice in the hospital environment. It seems that the issue of developing an appropriate language ensuring equal participation of the subjects of the expertise is important. Prospects for humanization of this practice are seen to be connected with the inclusion of representatives of patient communities and self-help groups of patients in this practice.

The nature of popular science discourse in recent decades has acquired a convincing function, while it is addressed to an audience that is not always loyal to science. There are new requirements for writing argumentative popular science texts and they must contain arguments that depend on the target audience. The need for a broad mastery of the skill of writing well-reasoned popular science texts is associated with the issues of understanding how successfully their function has been implemented to convince the audience and thе explication of technologies that help make these texts convincing, including the creation of a database of typical basic arguments. It is believed that the methods of computer analysis used in computational rhetoric can be used to study the argumentative specifics of popular science literature, and rhetorical argumentation should be the most productive approach to argumentation in a popular science text because only it provides ways of interacting with the audience. However, there are constraints for the development of this direction that make it difficult to find and annotate arguments in a popular science text, namely: an ambiguity in understanding the argument and argumentation, modeling various arguments depending on the understanding of their structure and function, and finally, the target audience modeling. Explication of arguments in the text is possible through linguistic markers, but there is a problem of establishing the boundaries of the argument. Identifying the internal structure of text segment relationships solves this problem, however, annotating the text is sensitive to certain methods of modeling argumentation. Based on the basic model of Toulmin's argument, the special aspects of modeling rhetorical argumentation and its dependence on the target audience are illustrated. It is proposed that the concept of a universal audience can hardly be adapted to practical tasks, and criteria that are consistent with the format of truths and the format of audience values, the implementation of which could bring the target audience closer to an universal one. The author demonstrates the features in the pragma-dialectical approach, which, despite its popularity in computational rhetoric, do not allow it to be fully adapted to popular science discourse.

The significance of the analysis of medical narrative is determined by its dissemination in recent decades in the context of humanization and individualization of medicine. Comparative content analysis of the texts shows that 'subjective understanding' (F. Schleiermacher), 'inner experience' and methods of descriptive psychology (W. Dilthey) are essential components of contemporary narrative analysis. The 'narrative turn' in socio-humanitarian knowledge became possible only after the questions about the genuine existence of man and the ways of understanding his individuality were worked out in various directions of the continental philosophy of the twentieth century. The growing popularity of the narrative approach in the field of medicine is due to theoretical, methodological, and practical changes that occurred in medicine: the rejection of the priority of the biomedical model of health, the principle of paternalism, objectification of the patient and disease. Changes in the structure of diseases also played an important role in its spread. However, as the analysis of the content and methodological foundations of the medical narrative has shown, one should not absolutize its possibilities in solving the problems of patient individualization, preserving his/her identity and, ultimately, in optimizing the treatment process.