Difference between revisions of "Conclusions on the status quo in the logic of medical language regarding the masticatory system"

<blockquote>IThe proposed alternative philosophical paradigm, called the "Engineering Paradigm of Science" implies alternative philosophical assumptions regarding aspects such as the purpose of science, the character of knowledge, the epistemic and pragmatic criteria for the acceptance of knowledge and the role of technological tools. Consequently, scientific researchers need so-called metacognitive scaffolds to aid in the analysis and reconstruction of how "knowledge" is constructed in different disciplines. <ref>Boon M, Van Baalen S, «'''Epistemology for interdisciplinary research - shifting philosophical paradigms of science'''», in [[:Category:Citations from Eur J Philos Sci|Eur J Philos Sci]], 2019. <small>DOI:10.1007/s13194-018-0242-4</small> </ref><ref>Boon M, «'''An engineering paradigm in the biomedical sciences: Knowledge as epistemic tool'''», in [[:Category:Citations from Prog Biophys Mol Biol|Prog Biophys Mol Biol]], 2017.<small>DOI:10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2017.04.001</small> </ref> Precisely these 'Metacognitive Scaffolds' have allowed us to consider an important requirement in diagnostics that of 'basic knowledge' which tends to reduce the vagueness and ambiguity of the logic of medical language.<ref>Codish S, Shiffman RN, «'''A model of ambiguity and vagueness in clinical practice guideline recommendations'''», in [[:Category:Citations from AMIA Annu Symp Proc|AMIA Annu Symp Proc]], 2005.<small>PMID:16779019</small></ref></blockquote>