[Frankiej]

I mean, I know in my head why it's considered to be an art, but can't seem to express it well. To me, it's an art as you have to deal with the delicate nature of human emotion, whilst sticking to protocol and procedures. What do you guys think?

[Rtcw]

Medicine is factual, therefore it's science.

/thread.

[canŵio]

i wouldn't say it was an art - it's a science.

hence why to do art, you have to do a-levels in science subjects such as biology, chemistry, physics, maths...

[Elwyn]

Leonardo da Vinci's drawings of the human form are still some of the best images of human anatomy and are definitely worthy of being called art. Or, a far more controversial character to discuss would be Gunther von Hagens who creates beautiful sculptures of the human form the dissection of cadavers.

[Frankiej]

(Original post by Rtcw)
Medicine is factual, therefore it's science.

/thread.

Okay, I should have said a career in medicine.

[Nice.Guy]

It is an art.
To really succeed in Medicine, you need time, effort, practice and skill - Medicine is all about reacting to difficult problems under lots of pressure; no-one is naturally good at it, and you can never be 'perfect' in that field...

[boba]

art :"The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination" (taken straight from google before someone points that out)
I think medicine could fit in there but only if your doing more unusual things not day to day routine stuff.

[gozatron]

You could argue it's both. A science in the obvious ways and then an artform in the whole delivery of treatments and communicating with patients.

[Neurology.]

I believe medicine and art have similar attributes. Both have intricate designs and can be spontaneous at times. Sometimes making diagnosises you have to look outside the box and be spontaneous...

[Neurology.]

Read http://medic-student.blogspot.co.uk/...r-art.html?m=1

[Mushi_master]

Anyone who's spent any time dealing with patients will concur its just as much a performing art as a science. There's no scientific/factual approach of dealing with all the individuals you'll be communicating with and examining.

[Deeduldum]

It's easy to see how cosmetic surgery involves a mixture of art and science. However technically good some cosmetic surgeons are, there will always be differences in outcomes if each of them was to treat a given patient to reduce the size of their nose for example. They have to use artistic and aesthetic interpretation to decide what will be the best outcome as well as their scientific and technical knowledge.

The use of personal judgement from experience versus the use of a scientific body of knowledge may in some ways suggest the extent to which a doctor is practising medicine as an art versus practising medicine as a science. The problem of discussing medicine as an art versus a science is that both terms are value-laden and people often see one approach as superior to the other.

There's an interesting article here about the subject, though not necessarily conclusive or neutral!
http://mh.bmj.com/content/26/1/18.full

[7589200]

fluid balance is more an art than a science in my experience

[purplefrog]

While medicine is underpinned by science, it's practice requires a certain knack - an art. Patients you see are rarely textbook cases, conditions they have won't necessarily present with all the standard symptoms and the standard severity listed in the books - there is a huge factor of uncertainty which has to be handled through judgement and reflecting upon experience. In addition to that, there is an art to communicating with patients - you can train and learn skills to an extent, but after certain points you need to have the natural ability to connect and truly understand how to appropriately behave in the plethora of situations thrown at you. This is what gives medicine its human dimension and is the artful side to it.

[Democracy]

(Original post by Rtcw)
Medicine is factual, therefore it's science.

/thread.

Medical science is science. Medicine as a discipline and a profession is much more than medical science however.

And simply being "factual" doesn't make something a science anyway.

[LewisCRHolliday]

(Original post by Nice.Guy)
It is an art.
To really succeed in Medicine, you need time, effort, practice and skill - Medicine is all about reacting to difficult problems under lots of pressure; no-one is naturally good at it, and you can never be 'perfect' in that field...

I think you're confusing the terms 'art' and 'skill'.
Medicine serves a practical purpose, Art does not.

[Nice.Guy]

(Original post by LewisCRHolliday)
I think you're confusing the terms 'art' and 'skill'.
Medicine serves a practical purpose, Art does not.

I don't even remember writing that post it was so long ago haha

Well, I mean art in the most general sense of the word - quick google definition gave me "The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination". Which is pretty much what I'm trying to say - that it is hugely variable, and will depend on the skill and imagination of the doctor. Treating a patient isn't just a simple matter a computer could do. It requires an element of 'art'.