Posted by SLS on March 30, 2008, at 8:07:26
I posted this on the Medication Board. I thought it might be more applicable here, so I'm reposting it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shall we use inductive reasoning rather than deductive reasoning when seeking a treatment for mental illness?1) Inductive = detailed facts -> general principles (empirical observation)
2) Deductive = general -> specific (cause and effect)
I favor inductive reasoning. The precise clinical reactions to a series of drug trials can be observed. One can then make a statement as to the statistical rate of success using associations. Out of 100 cases of melancholia, if 65% respond to imipramine and 25% to fluoxetine, one may infer and generalize that imipramine is more effective than fluoxetine in treating this subtype of depression. However, if one takes all of the physiological information that neuroscience has gathered to apply deductive reasoning, one is probably less apt to guess right and predict the effects of a specific treatment for each patient. There are still too many unknown variables to be elucidated.
As the mountains of information gleaned from the study of the brain begin to be assembled properly, deduction may one day supplant induction as the way a clinician approaches treatment.
We here at Psycho-Babble might be doing ourselves harm by assuming we understand enough about the brain and pharmacology to choose drugs for each other. Arrogance plus ignorance can be a lethal combination.
- Scott
poster:SLS
thread:820647
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/neuro/20080204/msgs/820647.html