Doctors often do not follow the guidelines of good practice based on evidence-based medicine, and this “clinical inertia” may represent an impediment to efficient care. The aims of this article are as follows: 1) to demonstrate that this phenomenon is often the consequence of a discrepancy between the technical rationality of evidence-based medicine and the modes of reasoning of physicians practiced in “real-life”, which is marked by uncertainty and risk; 2) to investigate in this context the meaning of the recent, somewhat paradoxical, concept of “individualized guidelines”; and 3) to revisit the real, essentially pedagogical, place of guidelines in medical practice.