ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL AND SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS ABOUT HUMAN IN CONNECTION WITH INCREASING DIFFICULTY OF PATIENT CARE. INTRODUCTION

Abstract

Ideas about a person help you understand or explain your own actions or the actions of others. Individual and scientific images of a person are transmitted through upbringing and education, possibly also through "genetic" memory. These images of people form the structure of human perception. Human actions are ultimately based on this perception. Thinking about one's own image of a person and deciphering other people's images of a person always have a reductionist character. This may explain why action-oriented disciplines such as a doctor, psychologist or nurse have a specific view of the person. The successes of individual scientific disciplines are the result of a deep division, or rather, the dismemberment of the whole in order to supposedly better explain or understand a person. But putting the pieces back together is often overlooked. The process of disassembling or deepening and thus constantly recognizing the essence of a person is an ongoing task. However, people often make decisions against the background of current (everyday) observations. But this also means that before making decisions for the future, we must think in advance about their consequences for a person. The formulation of such foresight or scenarios of the future must be made on the basis of the perception of the entire human being, and not only take into account the consequences for partial concepts of the human being. In the health care system, patients, professions and institutions meet each other. These professions, equipped, by the way, with an excellent repertoire of scientific discoveries made for humanity within the framework of individual sciences, are faced precisely for this reason with conflicting images and perspectives of humanity. The latter influence practical actions. Parallel to this, a growing individualization of therapeutic therapies can be observed in practice. This increases the complexity of the activity. It also means the development or, rather, a clearer differentiation of subjects into specialists and generalists. In other words, we are talking about processes based on the division of labor, in which the specialist receives a higher status in terms of competence in decision-making, economics and social power. The article examines the subjective orientation in the treatment of diseases and the need for care, the consequences of a supra-institutional perspective of therapeutic processes and the solution of the problem of divergence of competencies and interests of actors through the perspective of a person in his essential unity.