The point I was aiming for is that to be able to achieve both beneficence and non-maleficence in an unfamiliar situation is exceptionally difficult.
The key is that this isn't achieved by bullshit artistry, system 1 pattern recognition, or the efficient application of diesel 2/4
For it to be achieved at a high level it is about the effective application of knowledge, clinical methods and a sound understanding of Bayesian/ probabilistic reasoning so that the patient doesn't come to harm as a result of our ignorance 3/4
It's about recognising that we are never completely ignorant and that systematic assessment and reasoning will often result in an effective guide in a difficult situation 4/4
@MarcusYalman
I can see why you'd think that but I think you're misunderstanding my point. It's not about bullshiting it's about the effective application of method and deduction in an unfamiliar situation
@DanielKlapaukh
I prefer to think I make steady progress walking safely on uncharted unstable ground.
I am not always entirely certain in the beginning what is the best route BUT will determine and follow a safe course.