Of Scalpels and Stethoscopes: Technology and the Plural Character of Medicine 
Joel Cox, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO

From family units and sports teams to corporations and nations, plural actor of various sorts abound. Each of these plural actors has characteristics that define them as an entity and that cannot be reduced to characteristics that each of the individuals within the entity has. Rather, characteristics are had by the plural actor itself. In our contemporary world, one of the most prominent plural actors is the medical profession, composed of doctors, nurses, and many others that wield expertise and technology as a means of diagnosis and treatment. As with other plural actors, the character of the medical profession is revealed through the technologies it uses, including the stethoscope, the scalpel, and the language of medical terminology, among others. Using Margaret Gilbert’s concept of plural subjects and Ludger Jansen’s concept of institutional subjects, I argue that these medical technologies reveal and make possible the plural character of the medical profession. One cannot understand the medical profession or how it relates to its patients without understanding its use of medical technologies. To make this argument, I explain what plural and institutional subjects are in general, paying particular attention to joint commitment as Gilbert describes it. Then, I examine how plural entities, like the medical profession, have a specific plural character that is integral to how they are perceived and operated by others. Finally, I explore how the stethoscope, the scalpel, the pulse oximeter, the spirometer, and the language of medical terminology reveal both the beneficial and harmful aspects of the plural character of the medical profession. By understanding the role of these technologies in forming medicine’s character, we can better understand how individual physicians gain both the positive and negative traits of the plural whole through their use of these tools.