“怎么办呢?”我们运动亟待解决的问题”

Gwyn Prins
{"title":"“怎么办呢?”我们运动亟待解决的问题”","authors":"Gwyn Prins","doi":"10.1016/0160-7987(81)90044-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The paper suggests that a danger which faces the integrated study of health and medicine in Africa is a failure to attend closely enough at this early stage to the differences in concepts and taxonomies originating in each contributing specialism. This is because the new division of the subject which accompanies an integrated perspective upon it no longer follows the division of labour which used to be, broadly, between disciplines. So as those stark but comforting contrasts blur, it is important to keep hold of a robust and usable conceptual apparatus if we are to avoid deep confusion. Therefore, preferring to risk oversimplification rather than precocious complication, each of the three contributing disciplines—medicine, anthropology and history—is examined and the burning questions of the moment in each are proposed. In this process, the contributions which each can make to the new alignment become obvious. Equally, the limitations upon the new alignment are exposed, and the paper ends with a note of caution.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":79261,"journal":{"name":"Social science & medicine. Part B, Medical anthropology","volume":"15 3","pages":"Pages 175-183"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1981-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0160-7987(81)90044-2","citationCount":"125","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“What is to be done? Burning questions of our movement”\",\"authors\":\"Gwyn Prins\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0160-7987(81)90044-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The paper suggests that a danger which faces the integrated study of health and medicine in Africa is a failure to attend closely enough at this early stage to the differences in concepts and taxonomies originating in each contributing specialism. This is because the new division of the subject which accompanies an integrated perspective upon it no longer follows the division of labour which used to be, broadly, between disciplines. So as those stark but comforting contrasts blur, it is important to keep hold of a robust and usable conceptual apparatus if we are to avoid deep confusion. Therefore, preferring to risk oversimplification rather than precocious complication, each of the three contributing disciplines—medicine, anthropology and history—is examined and the burning questions of the moment in each are proposed. In this process, the contributions which each can make to the new alignment become obvious. Equally, the limitations upon the new alignment are exposed, and the paper ends with a note of caution.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79261,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social science & medicine. Part B, Medical anthropology\",\"volume\":\"15 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 175-183\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1981-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0160-7987(81)90044-2\",\"citationCount\":\"125\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social science & medicine. Part B, Medical anthropology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0160798781900442\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social science & medicine. Part B, Medical anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0160798781900442","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 125

摘要

这篇论文表明,非洲卫生和医学综合研究面临的一个危险是,在这个早期阶段未能足够密切地注意到源自每个贡献专业的概念和分类的差异。这是因为新的学科分工伴随着一种综合的视角,它不再遵循过去广义上学科之间的劳动分工。因此,当这些鲜明但令人欣慰的对比变得模糊时,如果我们要避免深刻的困惑,重要的是要保持一个强大而可用的概念工具。因此,为了避免过于简单化的风险,而不是过早地复杂化,我们对医学、人类学和历史这三个有贡献的学科进行了考察,并提出了每个学科当前的紧迫问题。在这个过程中,每个人对新联盟的贡献变得显而易见。同样,在新的对准上的限制是暴露的,论文以一个注意事项结束。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“What is to be done? Burning questions of our movement”

The paper suggests that a danger which faces the integrated study of health and medicine in Africa is a failure to attend closely enough at this early stage to the differences in concepts and taxonomies originating in each contributing specialism. This is because the new division of the subject which accompanies an integrated perspective upon it no longer follows the division of labour which used to be, broadly, between disciplines. So as those stark but comforting contrasts blur, it is important to keep hold of a robust and usable conceptual apparatus if we are to avoid deep confusion. Therefore, preferring to risk oversimplification rather than precocious complication, each of the three contributing disciplines—medicine, anthropology and history—is examined and the burning questions of the moment in each are proposed. In this process, the contributions which each can make to the new alignment become obvious. Equally, the limitations upon the new alignment are exposed, and the paper ends with a note of caution.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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