Distinctions and Differentiations between Medicine and Religion

Q2 Arts and Humanities Asian Medicine Pub Date : 2020-03-19 DOI:10.1163/15734218-12341452
Katrin Killinger, C. Kleine, K. Triplett
{"title":"Distinctions and Differentiations between Medicine and Religion","authors":"Katrin Killinger, C. Kleine, K. Triplett","doi":"10.1163/15734218-12341452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis special section of Asian Medicine brings together three scholars of the history of healing practices and medicine in premodern Asian societies to explore whether and how emic boundaries between religion and medicine were drawn in different historical contexts. In this introduction, we use the example of ancient Japan in an attempt to show how first steps towards a separation of religion and medicine can be identified, even when they have not yet been clearly differentiated institutionally or distinguished conceptually as distinct fields of action. By doing so, we operationalize the macro-sociological question central to the ‘multiple secularities’ approach, namely how ‘secular’ fields of action—here, curing disease—emancipate themselves from ‘religion’ in premodern ‘non-Western’ societies. We propose to look for differences in the framing and interpretation of healing activities, for the ascription of either (professional) competence or (religious) charisma to the healers, to ask whether the activities are to be interpreted as a social function or service, and to identify the sources of authority and legitimacy. This is followed by a brief summary and discussion of the contributions by Selby, Czaja, and Triplett.","PeriodicalId":34972,"journal":{"name":"Asian Medicine","volume":"28 3 1","pages":"233-262"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15734218-12341452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This special section of Asian Medicine brings together three scholars of the history of healing practices and medicine in premodern Asian societies to explore whether and how emic boundaries between religion and medicine were drawn in different historical contexts. In this introduction, we use the example of ancient Japan in an attempt to show how first steps towards a separation of religion and medicine can be identified, even when they have not yet been clearly differentiated institutionally or distinguished conceptually as distinct fields of action. By doing so, we operationalize the macro-sociological question central to the ‘multiple secularities’ approach, namely how ‘secular’ fields of action—here, curing disease—emancipate themselves from ‘religion’ in premodern ‘non-Western’ societies. We propose to look for differences in the framing and interpretation of healing activities, for the ascription of either (professional) competence or (religious) charisma to the healers, to ask whether the activities are to be interpreted as a social function or service, and to identify the sources of authority and legitimacy. This is followed by a brief summary and discussion of the contributions by Selby, Czaja, and Triplett.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医学与宗教的区别与区别
亚洲医学的这个特别部分汇集了三位研究前现代亚洲社会治疗实践和医学史的学者,探讨宗教和医学之间的界限是否以及如何在不同的历史背景下被划定。在本引言中,我们以古代日本为例,试图说明如何识别宗教和医学分离的第一步,即使它们尚未在制度上明确区分或在概念上区分为不同的行动领域。通过这样做,我们将“多重世俗”方法的核心宏观社会学问题付诸实施,即在前现代“非西方”社会中,“世俗”行动领域(这里是治疗疾病)如何从“宗教”中解放出来。我们建议在治疗活动的框架和解释中寻找差异,为治疗师(专业)能力或(宗教)魅力的归属,询问这些活动是否应被解释为社会功能或服务,并确定权威和合法性的来源。接下来是对Selby、Czaja和Triplett的贡献的简要总结和讨论。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Asian Medicine
Asian Medicine Arts and Humanities-Arts and Humanities (all)
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Asian Medicine -Tradition and Modernity is a multidisciplinary journal aimed at researchers and practitioners of Asian Medicine in Asia as well as in Western countries. It makes available in one single publication academic essays that explore the historical, anthropological, sociological and philological dimensions of Asian medicine as well as practice reports from clinicians based in Asia and in Western countries. With the recent upsurge of interest in non-Western alternative approaches to health care, Asian Medicine - Tradition and Modernity will be of relevance to those studying the modifications and adaptations of traditional medical systems on their journey to non-Asian settings.
期刊最新文献
Mao’s Bestiary: Medicinal Animals and Modern China, written by Liz P. Y. Chee The Practice of Texts: Education and Healing in South India, written by Anthony Cerulli Healing at the Periphery: Ethnographies of Tibetan Medicine in India, edited by Laurent Pordié and Stephan Kloos Collating and Interpreting the Medical Bamboo Slips Excavated from the Han Tombs in Tianhui Town Madness in the Family: Women, Care, and Illness in Japan, written by H. Yumi Kim
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1