Abstract:
This research analyses the diagnostic practices of Greek and Ayurvedic medicine, exploring their potential contributions to contemporary healthcare. While both Greek and Ayurvedic medicine have a rich history and continue to be practiced today, the effectiveness of their diagnostic methods in comparison to modern medicine remains a topic of debate. By exploring the commonalities and divergences in their approaches, this study aims to gain valuable insights into the art of diagnosis and its potential contributions to a more comprehensive understanding of health. Employing a qualitative research methodology with historical and content analysis, this study analyses primary sources like the Hippocratic Corpus and the Charaka Samhita as its methodology along with relevant secondary sources. The main focus of the study is on non-invasive techniques like observation, interrogation, palpation, and bodily fluid analysis. The analysis reveals both commonalities and divergences in the diagnostic approaches of these two historical traditions. Both emphasise a patient-centered approach, understanding health as a balance between body, mind, and environment. Greek medicine focuses on detailed medical history and observation of external signs, while Ayurveda incorporates elements like pulse and tongue diagnosis. Despite limitations inherent in historical research, this comparative analysis offers valuable insights. By understanding these historical approaches, this study offers new knowledge for promoting a more comprehensive understanding of health and a more patient-centered approach to diagnosis in contemporary healthcare. Furthermore, the emphasis on observation and non-invasive techniques in these traditions holds promise for future research in integrative medicine, which seeks to combine conventional and complementary medical practices. This research paves the way for further exploration of how these historical diagnostic methods can inform a more holistic and patient-centered future for healthcare.
