Abstract:The aim of this essay is to elaborate philosophical and ethical underpinnings of posthumous diagnosis of famous historical figures based on literary and artistic products, or commonly called retrospective diagnosis. It discusses ontological and epistemic challenges raised in the humanities and social sciences, and attempts to systematically reply to their criticisms from the viewpoint of clinical medicine, philosophy of medicine, particularly the ontology of disease and the epistemology of diagnosis, and medical ethics. The ontological challenge focuses on the doubt about the persistence of a disease over historical time, whereas the epistemic challenge disputes the inaccessibility of scientific verification of a diagnosis in the past. I argue that the critics are in error in conflating the taxonomy of disease (nosology) and the act of diagnosing a patient. Medical diagnosis is fundamentally a hypothesis-construction and an explanatory device that can be generated under various degrees of uncertainty and limited amount of information. It is not an apodictic judgment (true or false) as the critics presuppose, but a probabilistic (Bayesian) judgment with varying degrees of plausibility under uncertainty. In order to avoid this confusion, I propose that retrospective diagnosis of a historical figure be syndromic without identifying underlying disease, unless there is justifiable reason for such specification. Moreover it should be evaluated not only from the viewpoint of medical science but also in a larger context of the scholarship of the humanities and social sciences by its overall plausibility and consistency. On the other hand, I will endorse their concerns regarding the ethics and professionalism of retrospective diagnosis, and call for the need for situating such a diagnosis in an interdisciplinary scope and the context of the scholarship of the historical figure. I will then enumerate several important caveats for interdisciplinary retrospective diagnosis using an example of the retrospective diagnosis of Socrates for his life-long intermittent neurologic symptoms. Finally, I will situate the present argument in a larger context of the major debate among the historians of medicine and paleopathologists, and discuss the similarities and differences.

Diagnosis: What Is the Structure of Its Reasoning?

The logic of diagnosis: Peirce, literary narrative, and the history of present illness

Reconstructing truth, deconstructing ADHD: Badiou, onto-epistemological violence and the diagnosis of ADHD

A theory of diagnosis from first principles

Inferences of clinical diagnostic reasoning and diagnostic error

Clinical reasoning performance assessment: using situated cognition theory as a conceptual framework

Dual process models of clinical reasoning: The central role of knowledge in diagnostic expertise

A More General Theory of Diagnosis from First Principles

What is an Optimal Diagnosis?

Abductive and Consistency-Based Diagnosis Revisited: a Modeling Perspective

Diagnosis and Reality: A Noun is A Terrible Thing to Waste

Toward a philosophical structure for psychiatry

Diagnostic Reasoning in Natural Language: Computational Model and Application

Anatomy of diagnosis in a clinical encounter: how clinicians discuss uncertainty with patients

Diagnostic reasoning in Nizāmī 'Arūzī's Four Discourses

Four Core Concepts in Psychiatric Diagnosis

Reasoning in Social Settings

Retrospective diagnosis of a famous historical figure: ontological, epistemic, and ethical considerations

Description of Diagnosis Process: A Review of Existing Measures and a New Approach

Model-Based Diagnosis using Structured System Descriptions

Diagnostic Reasoning and Cognitive Biases of Nurse Practitioners