流行病、少数群体和偏见：区分知识与思想

Q3 Medicine

Ethics, Medicine and Public Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jemep.2024.100996

M. Simões Mendes

{"title":"流行病、少数群体和偏见：区分知识与思想","authors":"M. Simões Mendes","doi":"10.1016/j.jemep.2024.100996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite the sensible and dramatic moment that the world has faced with the pandemic provoked by the novel coronavirus, something is not novel – the ‘attack’ and the struggle for what is most precious: knowledge.</p></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><p>It is a critical theoretical essay.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Throughout history, something most threatening had a direct or indirect relationship with what was most valuable (e.g., Socrates, Copernicus, among others). Evidently, the best resources of knowledge and approaches must be used to collaborate with the analysis of social domains regarding the Covid-19 pandemic. However, it is crucial to use different approaches so as not to foster the same harmful consequences.</p></div><div><h3>Perspectives</h3><p>Developing novel theoretical approaches does not dispense the ability and need to think.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37707,"journal":{"name":"Ethics, Medicine and Public Health","volume":"32 ","pages":"Article 100996"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pandemic, minorities, and prejudice: Distinguishing knowledge and thought\",\"authors\":\"M. Simões Mendes\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jemep.2024.100996\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite the sensible and dramatic moment that the world has faced with the pandemic provoked by the novel coronavirus, something is not novel – the ‘attack’ and the struggle for what is most precious: knowledge.</p></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><p>It is a critical theoretical essay.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Throughout history, something most threatening had a direct or indirect relationship with what was most valuable (e.g., Socrates, Copernicus, among others). Evidently, the best resources of knowledge and approaches must be used to collaborate with the analysis of social domains regarding the Covid-19 pandemic. However, it is crucial to use different approaches so as not to foster the same harmful consequences.</p></div><div><h3>Perspectives</h3><p>Developing novel theoretical approaches does not dispense the ability and need to think.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics, Medicine and Public Health\",\"volume\":\"32 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100996\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics, Medicine and Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352552524000318\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics, Medicine and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352552524000318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景尽管世界面临着由新型冠状病毒引发的大流行病这一敏感而又戏剧性的时刻，但有些东西并不新奇--"攻击 "和争夺最宝贵的东西：知识。方法这是一篇批判性理论文章。讨论纵观历史，最具威胁性的东西与最有价值的东西有着直接或间接的关系（如苏格拉底、哥白尼等）。显而易见，必须利用最好的知识资源和方法来合作分析有关 Covid-19 大流行病的社会领域。然而，关键是要使用不同的方法，以免造成同样的有害后果。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Pandemic, minorities, and prejudice: Distinguishing knowledge and thought

Background

Despite the sensible and dramatic moment that the world has faced with the pandemic provoked by the novel coronavirus, something is not novel – the ‘attack’ and the struggle for what is most precious: knowledge.

Methodology

It is a critical theoretical essay.

Discussion

Throughout history, something most threatening had a direct or indirect relationship with what was most valuable (e.g., Socrates, Copernicus, among others). Evidently, the best resources of knowledge and approaches must be used to collaborate with the analysis of social domains regarding the Covid-19 pandemic. However, it is crucial to use different approaches so as not to foster the same harmful consequences.

Perspectives

Developing novel theoretical approaches does not dispense the ability and need to think.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Ethics, Medicine and Public Health Medicine-Health Policy

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

0.00%

发文量

107

审稿时长

42 days

期刊介绍： This review aims to compare approaches to medical ethics and bioethics in two forms, Anglo-Saxon (Ethics, Medicine and Public Health) and French (Ethique, Médecine et Politiques Publiques). Thus, in their native languages, the authors will present research on the legitimacy of the practice and appreciation of the consequences of acts towards patients as compared to the limits acceptable by the community, as illustrated by the democratic debate.