We consider the influence that John Forrester’s work has had on thinking in, with, and from cases in multiple disciplines. Forrester’s essay ‘If p, Then What? Thinking in Cases’ was published in History of the Human Sciences in 1996 and transformed understandings of what a case was, and how case-based thinking worked in numerous human sciences (including, centrally, psychoanalysis). Forrester’s collection of essays Thinking in Cases was published posthumously, after his untimely death in 2015, and is the inspiration for the special issue we introduce. This comprises new research from authors working in and across the history of science and medicine, gender and sexuality studies, philosophy of science, semiotics, film studies, literary studies and comparative literature, psychoanalytic studies, medical humanities, and sociology. This research addresses what it means to reason in cases in particular temporal, spatial, or genre-focused contexts; introduces new figures (e.g. Eugène Azam, C. S. Peirce, Michael Balint) into lineages of case-based reasoning; emphasizes the unfinished and unfinishable character of some case reading and autobiographical accounts; and shows the frequency with which certain kinds of reasoning attempted with cases fail (often in instructive ways). The special issue opens up new directions for thinking and working with cases and case-based reasoning in the humanities and human sciences.

中文翻译：

---

与 John Forrester 一起思考、处理、跨越和超越案例

我们考虑了约翰·福雷斯特 (John Forrester) 的工作对多学科案例的思考、案例思考和案例思考的影响。Forrester 的文章“如果 p，那么什么？Thinking in Cases 于 1996 年发表在《人文科学史》上，改变了对案例的理解，以及基于案例的思维如何在众多人文科学中发挥作用（主要包括精神分析）。Forrester 的散文集 Thinking in Cases 在他 2015 年英年早逝后于死后出版，是我们介绍的特刊的灵感来源。这包括在科学和医学史、性别和性研究、科学哲学、符号学、电影研究、文学研究和比较文学、精神分析研究、医学人文科学和社会学领域工作的作者的新研究。这项研究解决了在特定的时间、空间或以流派为重点的背景下进行推理的意义；将新人物（例如 Eugène Azam、CS Peirce、Michael Balint）引入基于案例推理的谱系；强调一些案例阅读和自传的未完成和无法完成的特征；并显示尝试对案例进行某些类型的推理失败的频率（通常以有指导意义的方式）。本期特刊为人文和人文科学中案例和基于案例的推理的思考和工作开辟了新的方向。强调一些案例阅读和自传的未完成和无法完成的特征；并显示尝试对案例进行某些类型的推理失败的频率（通常以有指导意义的方式）。本期特刊为人文和人文科学中案例和基于案例的推理的思考和工作开辟了新的方向。强调一些案例阅读和自传的未完成和无法完成的特征；并显示尝试对案例进行某些类型的推理失败的频率（通常以有指导意义的方式）。本期特刊为人文和人文科学中案例和基于案例的推理的思考和工作开辟了新的方向。