Forrester’s proposed seventh style of reasoning – thinking in cases – functions as an analogous, dyadic relationship that, whilst indebted philosophically to the logical reasoning and semiotics of Charles Peirce, is prone to creating feedback loops between induction and deduction, precluding novel abductive hypotheses from advancing medical knowledge. Reasoning with a Peircean triadic model opens up the contexts and methods of meaning-making and reasoning through medical cases, and the potent influence of their genre conventions, to intellectual critical scrutiny. Vitally, it offers a third mode – abduction – that this article argues needs to be reintroduced into Forrester’s model of reasoning with cases. This article demonstrates this by applying a Peircean triadic model of reasoning to Forrester’s own model, tracing a shared genealogy but one in which the abductive element was lost. The article goes on to illustrate the explanatory and predictive potential of Peircean abductive reasoning and the necessary re-theorising of the case this entails. This argument is supported through an analysis of early case reports of what would become HIV/Aids, drawn from the Case Records of Massachusetts General Hospital series in the New England Journal of Medicine.

中文翻译：

---

如果 p0，则 1：不可能考虑案例

Forrester 提出的第七种推理方式——在案例中思考——作为一种类似的二元关系发挥作用，虽然在哲学上归功于 Charles Peirce 的逻辑推理和符号学，但容易在归纳和演绎之间创建反馈循环，阻止新的溯因假设的推进医学知识。使用 Peircean 三元模型进行推理打开了通过医学案例产生意义和推理的​​背景和方法，以及它们的体裁惯例的强大影响，以进行智力批判性审查。至关重要的是，它提供了第三种模式——绑架——本文认为需要将其重新引入 Forrester 的案例推理模型。本文通过将 Peircean 三元推理模型应用于 Forrester 自己的模型来证明这一点，追踪一个共同的谱系，但其中的溯因元素丢失了。文章接着说明了 Peircean 溯因推理的解释和预测潜力以及必要的案例重新理论化。这一论点通过对早期病例报告的分析得到支持，这些病例报告来自新英格兰医学杂志的马萨诸塞州综合医院病例记录系列。