Artifice, Interpretation and Nature: Key Categories in Radiology Work
This paper extends on some prior work on nature, culture and computation. This paper will look at “image work” in a radiology department, i.e, how radiologists use images and other kinds of knowledge in daily clinical work. In particular, the paper will look at the role tacit knowledge and categories have in the work radiologists carry out. How radiologists make use of and contrast analog and digital representations of nature will be explored here because this is key to how radiologists work and think. In other words, the role that computer derived artifacts, correspondence theory and mimesis play in the clinical work of radiology will be discussed.
KeywordsRepresentation Memesis Correspondence theory Analog computation Radiology
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 5.Dupuy, J.-P.: The Mechanization of the Mind: On the Origins of Cognitive Science. M.B. Debevoise (trans). Princeton University Press, Princeton (2002)Google Scholar
- 6.Aristotle: Poetics. Malcom Heath (ed.) Penguin Group, London (1996)Google Scholar
- 8.Nyce, J.M.: Nature’s Machine: Mimesis, the Analog Computer and the Rhetoric of Technology. In: Patton, R. (ed.) Computing With Biological Metaphors, pp. 414–423. Chapman & Hall, London (1994)Google Scholar
- 10.Nyce, J.M., Kahn, P.: A Machine for the Mind: Vannevar Bush’s Memex. In: Nyce, J.M., Kahn, P. (eds.) From Memex to Hypertext: Vannevar Bush and the Mind’s Machine, pp. 39–66. Academic Press, Boston (1991)Google Scholar
- 11.Owens, L.: Where are We Going, Phil Morse? In: Changing Agendas and the Rhetoric of Obviousness in the Transformation of Computing at MIT, pp. 1939–1957; IEEE An. His. Comp. 18, 34–41 (1996)Google Scholar
- 12.Mindell, D.A.: Between Human and Machine: Feedback, Control, and Computing Before Cybernetics. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (2002)Google Scholar