| WHY HISTORY IS IMPORTANT FOR THE MEMBERS
OF THE CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PATHOLOGISTS?
Dr. Guillermo Quinonez
Archivist – May 2002 to June 2007
Founder and First President of the Humanities in Pathology Club – July 2003
to June 2007
I am convinced that the title of this presentation has
gone through the mind of many of us, and I presume this is one of the
reasons why we are here today. In the utilitarian world of today, spent
energies must be explained in order to justify efforts. In this regard,
there are important intangible benefits to the collective effort in
studying the history of the CAP. Therefore, studying our history is
important for us, pathologists.
Recently, I read in the Bulletin of the University of
Manitoba a pledge by the President Dr. Emoke Szathmary to support the
institution "in word and in deed." Her main argument was that
she supported the University because she believed "in the idea of a
university." Immediately I made the connection in my mind and
concluded that we must also support the CAP because we should believe in
"the idea of pathology," and we can do that "in word and in
deed" by studying the history of pathology in Canada. Let me now
explain "why" we can and "how" we could accomplish
this pledge.
It is always illuminating to start with a topic like
this by defining its main concepts, and history, identity and community
are three of them. Many definitions of history refer to records of past
events with their causes and consequences. The one I like the most because
it is applicable to our case is a simple one,"history is one of the
modes of learning from experiences." This definition is telling us
that history is the study of our own experiences, the study of ourselves.
This reflection is linked to the other concept, that of identity, simply
defined as, “who we are.” But identity is closely linked to community,
represented in our case by the membership in the CAP. We cannot assume
that there is an automatic identification and homogeneity in attitudes in
any group. Communities are constructed. And this is the role I foresee for
history in our organization.
The history of pathology, therefore, can become a
vehicle to obtain identity if the latter is defined as a sense of
community. It helps to understand better who we are and also to understand
better our direction and purposes for the benefit of the CAP. History,
therefore, is not the repetition of names and dates but the search for our
collective identity, a lifetime enterprise since "history is about
men and their act in society." The history of pathology in Canada is
indeed about the experience of past, present and future members of this
organization. As expressed by the historian Henry Sigerist, “Medical
history teaches us where we come from, where we stand in medicine at the
present time, and in what direction we are marching. It is the compass
that guides us into the future.”
In the search for our collective identity, the history
of pathology provides a scientific, intellectual, social, cultural and
political context. Without clarification in our minds of the origins and
developments of our specialty, we cannot understand our current role in
the medical and in the Canadian societies. Included are the forces and
events that have shaped our profession to become what it is today. What is
the common background of the participants in this conference that make us
equal in spite of our diverse nationalities of origin, color of skin,
accents, subspecialties, etc.? And I am not talking about professional
credentials. I am talking about something beyond that. I am talking,
again, about the collective identity of our community, which is the
essence of our organization. We are the CAP. This is "why" we
must study the history of pathology in Canada.
Since history, then, is not simply an uncritical
collection of the records of past events, "how" can we write it
in order to understand our identity? I think it can be obtained by using
three of the genres that exists for writing pathology history. The first
one, the traditional or interpretist, is the most popular among
physician-historians, and more or less consists of a collection of
previous facts and events but followed by conclusions based on induction.
Neither method, nor theory, nor model is necessary. It corresponds to the
British-North American style of writing history. The research only needs
accuracy, order, logic, honesty, self-awareness and imagination. Esmond
Long's "History of Pathology" is a classical example.
The second genre utilizes the positivist scientific
thinking in opposition to the sociology of knowledge. It is the same
approach as that used to write scientific literature and includes the
history of knowledge, discoveries and scientific ideas. The research needs
a hypothesis and its testing. I do not know of any particular example in
the history of pathology in the British-North American literature that
follows this model; the closest examples are works based on the history of
the philosophy of sciences as applied to medicine such as the book,
“Medical Thinking” by Lester King. Nevertheless, I strongly suspect
that they must exist in the continental European style of writing history.
As a classical example of this genre in the English literature, I would
like to mention Ernst Mayr, "The Growth of Biological Thought."
The book "Morbid Appearances" by Russell
Maulitz exemplifies the third genre. It is an example of what is known
today as social history. It is the style popular among
non-physician-historians and is based on the sociology of knowledge. In
this classic approach, Maulitz "recognizes not only scientific change
itself, but also the influence of culture and policy on attitudes towards
pathology. Moreover, he describes the transfer processes among different
European countries (in this case England and France) and how they, so to
speak, affect the exchange of knowledge among different cultures, as
well."
Our organization is more than 50 years old and has grown
up beyond the process of creation to that of maintenance and development.
We have reached maturity and, consequently, it is the right time to begin
doing scholarly work. The "idea" of pathology must be promoted
"in word and in deed" by all rather than as isolated efforts by
a few of us. We need to move to the reign of idealizations and perhaps
this group could eventually incorporate ethics and medical education among
others to become a chapter of medical humanities rather than history
alone. The CAP is mature enough to make this transition, and this Club can
be a forum for that goal. Everybody is welcome. |
