Hypothetical knowledge in the recognition process of disease. Methodological issues

  • S.V. Cherkasov
  • D.V. Politanska
Keywords: diagnosis of a disease, decision-making, forms of probable knowledge, internal and external illness background.


An important component of the diagnostic process is the use by a doctor of various types and forms of hypothetical knowledge. However, there is still no single understanding of such concepts as “creative guess”, “initial assumption”, “working hypothesis”, “scientific medical hypothesis”, “diagnostic hypothesis” among the representatives of the scientific medical community. This leads to a limited hypothesis process, which manifests itself in the absence of a clear understanding of the procedures for forming the hypothesis and its use as a means of obtaining a certain result. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to conduct logical and epistemological analysis of the forms of probable knowledge in medical diagnosis: the clarification of their specifics and differences, the functions they perform, the mechanism of their design in the clinic. The hypothesis is presented as a form of knowledge development and a fundamental unit that plays a prominent role in the diagnostic search process. The authors emphasize the presence of the dialectic effect of the feedback: the less signs of the disease fix the hypothesis, the more likely that in the further study, the examination of the patient will present facts that understanding it, and therefore the clinician must carefully weigh every new fact.


Botkin, S. P. (1970). Obshie osnovy klinicheskoj mediciny [General principles of clinical medicine]. SPb.: Zdorove.

Bruner, Dzh. (2008). Psikhologiia poznaniia. Za predelami neposredstvennoi informatsii [Psychology of knowledge. Outside immediate information]. Per. s angl. Moskva: Direktmedia Pablishing.

Dvornichenko, L. P. (1990). O meste i roli gipotezy v protsesse postanovki diagnoza [On the place and role of the hypothesis in the process of diagnosis]. V Filosofskie voprosy meditsiny i biologii. Kiev: Zdorove.

Kaznacheev, V. P. & Kuimov, A. D. (1984). Klinicheskii diagnoz [Clinical diagnosis]. Novosibirsk: Novosibirskii gosudarstvennyi meditsinskii universitet.

Kant, I. (2000). Krytyka chystogho rozumu [Criticism of pure reason]. Per. z nim. ta prymit. I. Burkovsjkogho. Kyjiv: Junivers.

Leman, E. L. (1979). Proverka statisticheskikh gipotez [Testing statistical hypotheses]. Per. s angl. Moskva: Nauka.

Leshchinskii L. A. & Dimov A. S. (1987) Pravomerno li poniatie “diagnosticheskaia gipoteza”. Klinicheskaia meditsina – Clinical medicine, 11, 138–141.

Marks, K. (1961). Kapital [Capital]. T. 3. Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe izdatelstvo politicheskoi literatury.

Merkulov, I. P. (1980). Gipotetiko-deduktivnaia model i razvitie nauchnogo znaniia [Hypothetical-deductive model and the development of scientific knowledge]. Moskva: Nauka.

Morozov, I. M. (1990). Priroda intuitsii [Nature of intuition]. Minsk: Izd. Universitetskoe.

Plank, M. (1966). Edinstvo fizicheskoi kartiny mira [The unity of the physical picture of the world]. Per. s nem. Moskva: Nauka.

Tarasov, K. E., Belikov, V. K. & Frolova, A. I. (1989). Logika i semiotika diagnoza [Logic and Semiotics Diagnosis]. Moskva: Meditsina.

Teilor, R. B. (1992). Trudnyi diagnoz [Difficult diagnosis]. V 2-kh tomakh, Per. s angl. Moskva.

Khomenko, I. V. (2016). Neformaljna loghika ta arghumentatyvne mirkuvannja. Filosofsjka dumka – Philosophical thought, 3, 34–46.

Chazov, E. I. (1998). Istoriia izucheniia ateroskleroza: istiny, gipotezy, spekuliatsii. Terapevticheskii arkhiv – Therapeutic archive, 9, 9–16.
How to Cite
Cherkasov, S., & Politanska, D. (2018). Hypothetical knowledge in the recognition process of disease. Methodological issues. Reports of Vinnytsia National Medical University, 22(4), 707-713. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31393/reports-vnmedical-2018-22(4)-24