Medicina, lélekfilozófia, kutatástörténet

András A. Gergely
{"title":"Medicina, lélekfilozófia, kutatástörténet","authors":"András A. Gergely","doi":"10.17107/kh.2023.26.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay focuses on interrelations among alternative aspects of medical knowledge and historically concerns the theoretical background of philosophical and anthropological works of the 18th and 19th centuries based on the Renaissance philosophy of humanity. The author determines the interpretive points of view in medicine and shows the development of relevant changes in social, historical and medical narratives in the modern ages. The first approach of criticism provides already a particular position in the oeuvre of Galeotto Marzio (Astrology, medical practice and physiognomic knowledge) a humanist researcher, which presents him as a philosopher of nature. The other interpretation of this historical timeline is the relation of Michel Foucault’s philosophical understanding of specific categories of power and sexuality in his works concerning the social sciences and historical criticism. This essay review focused on the popular and alternative thinkers of the 18th and 19th centuries while endeavoured to present the historical traditions and methods of the relevant body of knowledge based on alternative receipts and principles of medical and mechanical analogies of human interrelations. This point of view focused on some collective interpretations of the New Age historical presentation of some characteristics of the knowledge history and on the interpretation of messages targeting the present generation by means of critical methodology.","PeriodicalId":53287,"journal":{"name":"Kaleidoscope History","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kaleidoscope History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17107/kh.2023.26.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This essay focuses on interrelations among alternative aspects of medical knowledge and historically concerns the theoretical background of philosophical and anthropological works of the 18th and 19th centuries based on the Renaissance philosophy of humanity. The author determines the interpretive points of view in medicine and shows the development of relevant changes in social, historical and medical narratives in the modern ages. The first approach of criticism provides already a particular position in the oeuvre of Galeotto Marzio (Astrology, medical practice and physiognomic knowledge) a humanist researcher, which presents him as a philosopher of nature. The other interpretation of this historical timeline is the relation of Michel Foucault’s philosophical understanding of specific categories of power and sexuality in his works concerning the social sciences and historical criticism. This essay review focused on the popular and alternative thinkers of the 18th and 19th centuries while endeavoured to present the historical traditions and methods of the relevant body of knowledge based on alternative receipts and principles of medical and mechanical analogies of human interrelations. This point of view focused on some collective interpretations of the New Age historical presentation of some characteristics of the knowledge history and on the interpretation of messages targeting the present generation by means of critical methodology.
医学、灵魂哲学、研究史
本文侧重于医学知识的不同方面之间的相互关系,并在历史上关注18和19世纪基于文艺复兴时期人类哲学的哲学和人类学作品的理论背景。作者确定了医学的解释观点,并展示了现代社会、历史和医学叙事的相关变化的发展。批判的第一种方法已经在Galeotto Marzio的全部作品(占星术,医学实践和面相学知识)中提供了一个特殊的位置,一个人文主义研究者,这将他呈现为一个自然哲学家。对这一历史时间轴的另一种解释是米歇尔·福柯在他关于社会科学和历史批判的著作中对权力和性的具体范畴的哲学理解的关系。这篇文章的回顾集中在18世纪和19世纪的流行和另类思想家,同时努力呈现基于人类相互关系的医学和机械类比的替代收据和原则的相关知识体系的历史传统和方法。这一观点侧重于对新时代知识历史某些特征的历史呈现的一些集体解读,以及用批判方法论对针对当代人的信息的解读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信