Investigating Semmelweis's research through the Lipton's IBE and Bird's Holmesian inference

Nourmohammadi, Ahmadreza; Momeninia, Mahdi

doi:10.22054/wph.2024.76667.2203

Investigating Semmelweis's research through the Lipton's IBE and Bird's Holmesian inference

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Ahmadreza Nourmohammadi

Mahdi Momeninia

Philosophy Department, Shahid Beheshti University

https://doi.org/10.22054/wph.2024.76667.2203

Abstract

Semmelweis's research method in identifying the cause of puerperal fever in mothers has attracted the attention of philosophers of science for several decades. Some have used the reasonableness of the Semmelweis method to compare scientific methodology, and some have used this research to describe and evaluate scientific inference. However, despite the special attention paid to Semmelweis's research, there is still no consensus to explain his methodology.
In this article, after introducing the research of Semmelweis, we address the challenging question of whether the description of inference through the best explanation of Lipton and Holmesian inference-Bird's is sufficient in the reasonable reconstruction of the stages of Semmelweis's research. Is the inferential method of Semmelweis in finding the best explanation for the cause of puerperal fever consistent with the description of Lipton and Bird?
The results of the present research show that the description of Lipton and Bird is insufficient in the reasonable reconstruction of the research stages of Semmelweis Because their description of the stages of Semmelweis's research is not compatible with historical documents. However, according to Schupbach's approach, we argued that the ineffectiveness of a case example does not indicate the unreasonableness of an inference in general. Therefore, we concluded that despite the interest of Lipton and Bird, Semmelweis's research will not be a good historical example for the justification of inference through the best explanation and Holmesian inference. Semmelweis's case is the worst example for the best justification of it.

Keywords

Semmelweis

Lipton

Bird

IBE

Subjects

philosophy

Bird, A. (2005). “Abductive knowledge and Holmesian inference”. Oxford studies in epistemology, 1, 1-31.

Bird, A. (2007). “Inference to the only explanation”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2007.00028.x

Bird, A. (2010). “Eliminative abduction: examples from medicine”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 41(4), 345-352.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.10.009

Goodwin, W. (2015). “Revolution and progress in medicine”. Theoretical medicine and bioethics, 36, 25-39.

DOI: 10.1007/s11017-015-9319-7

Gillies, D. (2005). “Hempelian and Kuhnian approaches in the philosophy of medicine: The Semmelweis case”. Studies in history and philosophy of science part C: Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences, 36(1), 159-181.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2004.12.003

Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of natural science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kadar, N., Romero, R., & Papp, Z. (2018). Ignaz Semmelweis: the “Savior of Mothers”: On the 200th anniversary of his birth. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 219(6), 519-522.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2021.06.054

Kásler, M. (2018). “Ignaz Semmelweis, the Saviour of Mothers”. POLGÁRI SZEMLE: GAZDASÁGI ÉS TÁRSADALMI FOLYÓIRAT, 14(Spec.), 385-410.

https://doi.org/10.24307/psz.2018.0425

Lipton, Peter, (2004), “Inference to The Best Explanation”. Routledge.

Persson, J. (2009). “Semmelweis’s methodology from the modern stand-point: intervention studies and causal ontology”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 40(3), 204-209.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2009.06.003

Scholl, R. (2013). “Causal inference, mechanisms, and the Semmelweis case”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 44(1), 66-76.
DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2012.04.002

Semmelweis, I. (1983). The etiology, concept, and prophylaxis of childbed fever (K. Codell Carter trans and ed.). Madison WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Schupbach, J. N. (2014). “Is the bad lot objection just misguided?”. Erkenntnis, 79, 55-64

DOI:10.1007/s10670-013-9433-8

van Fraassen, B. C. (1989). Laws and Symmetry. Oxford University Press. *