补充医学的兴起与生物医学的唯物主义立场

H. Walach
{"title":"补充医学的兴起与生物医学的唯物主义立场","authors":"H. Walach","doi":"10.5750/EJPCH.V8I1.1827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is puzzling to observe that at a time when medicine has allegedly made huge progress in combating disease and increasing human wellbeing a counter-movement has arisen: “Complementary and Alternative Medicine  (CAM)”. Sometimes also called “Integrative Medicine” it is quite popular not only in pockets of Society, but across a large part of populations in Western countries. Media campaigns have been started to curb its success. CAM has to be seen against the mainstream background in medicine which has adopted the machine-paradigm proposed by Descartes. While this has been successful within acute medicine, it is less successful in dealing with chronic, functional or lifestyle diseases. By default, the machine paradigm ignores individuality, agency, the psyche, and has placed a taboo on spirituality. This happens, because the mainstream model of modern medicine buys into the materialism that is inherent in the machine paradigm and currently prevalent naturalism. In this sense, CAM can be seen as a counter-movement, mainly driven by public demand, but also by some renegade scientists. It offers the chance to articulate alternative views of the human organism, of human suffering and disease. It allows the discussion of spirituality and other topics that are shunned by mainstream medicine. Complexity science might be a bridge, which has started to understand that that human organism is vastly more complex than the simplistic machine model would have it. We will likely need a new paradigm that can integrate all those elements neglected in the current mainstream model, most notable spirituality and the notion of agency and freedom.","PeriodicalId":72966,"journal":{"name":"European journal for person centered healthcare","volume":"143 1","pages":"119-129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Rise of Complementary Medicine and the Materialist Stance of Biomedicine\",\"authors\":\"H. Walach\",\"doi\":\"10.5750/EJPCH.V8I1.1827\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is puzzling to observe that at a time when medicine has allegedly made huge progress in combating disease and increasing human wellbeing a counter-movement has arisen: “Complementary and Alternative Medicine  (CAM)”. Sometimes also called “Integrative Medicine” it is quite popular not only in pockets of Society, but across a large part of populations in Western countries. Media campaigns have been started to curb its success. CAM has to be seen against the mainstream background in medicine which has adopted the machine-paradigm proposed by Descartes. While this has been successful within acute medicine, it is less successful in dealing with chronic, functional or lifestyle diseases. By default, the machine paradigm ignores individuality, agency, the psyche, and has placed a taboo on spirituality. This happens, because the mainstream model of modern medicine buys into the materialism that is inherent in the machine paradigm and currently prevalent naturalism. In this sense, CAM can be seen as a counter-movement, mainly driven by public demand, but also by some renegade scientists. It offers the chance to articulate alternative views of the human organism, of human suffering and disease. It allows the discussion of spirituality and other topics that are shunned by mainstream medicine. Complexity science might be a bridge, which has started to understand that that human organism is vastly more complex than the simplistic machine model would have it. We will likely need a new paradigm that can integrate all those elements neglected in the current mainstream model, most notable spirituality and the notion of agency and freedom.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal for person centered healthcare\",\"volume\":\"143 1\",\"pages\":\"119-129\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal for person centered healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5750/EJPCH.V8I1.1827\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal for person centered healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5750/EJPCH.V8I1.1827","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

令人费解的是,正当医学据称在对抗疾病和增进人类福祉方面取得巨大进步的时候,却出现了一场相反的运动:“补充和替代医学(CAM)”。有时也被称为“中西医结合”,它不仅在社会上很受欢迎,而且在西方国家的大部分人口中也很受欢迎。媒体活动已经开始遏制它的成功。CAM必须在采用笛卡儿提出的机器范式的医学主流背景下看待。虽然这种方法在急症治疗中取得了成功,但在治疗慢性、功能性或生活方式疾病方面却不太成功。默认情况下,机器范式忽略了个性、代理、心灵,并对灵性设置了禁忌。之所以会出现这种情况,是因为现代医学的主流模式接受了机器范式和当前流行的自然主义所固有的唯物主义。从这个意义上说,CAM可以被视为一种反运动,主要由公众需求驱动,但也受到一些叛变的科学家的推动。它提供了阐明人类机体、人类苦难和疾病的不同观点的机会。它允许讨论灵性和其他主流医学回避的话题。复杂性科学可能是一座桥梁,让我们开始认识到,人类的有机体比简单的机器模型要复杂得多。我们可能需要一种新的范式,能够整合当前主流模式中被忽视的所有元素,最引人注目的是灵性、能动性和自由的概念。
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
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Rise of Complementary Medicine and the Materialist Stance of Biomedicine
It is puzzling to observe that at a time when medicine has allegedly made huge progress in combating disease and increasing human wellbeing a counter-movement has arisen: “Complementary and Alternative Medicine  (CAM)”. Sometimes also called “Integrative Medicine” it is quite popular not only in pockets of Society, but across a large part of populations in Western countries. Media campaigns have been started to curb its success. CAM has to be seen against the mainstream background in medicine which has adopted the machine-paradigm proposed by Descartes. While this has been successful within acute medicine, it is less successful in dealing with chronic, functional or lifestyle diseases. By default, the machine paradigm ignores individuality, agency, the psyche, and has placed a taboo on spirituality. This happens, because the mainstream model of modern medicine buys into the materialism that is inherent in the machine paradigm and currently prevalent naturalism. In this sense, CAM can be seen as a counter-movement, mainly driven by public demand, but also by some renegade scientists. It offers the chance to articulate alternative views of the human organism, of human suffering and disease. It allows the discussion of spirituality and other topics that are shunned by mainstream medicine. Complexity science might be a bridge, which has started to understand that that human organism is vastly more complex than the simplistic machine model would have it. We will likely need a new paradigm that can integrate all those elements neglected in the current mainstream model, most notable spirituality and the notion of agency and freedom.
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
期刊最新文献
The ethical and epistemic roles of narrative in person-centred healthcare Person-Centred Healthcare versus Patient Centricity - what is the difference and how are pharmaceutical companies aiming to secure internal representation of the patient voice? Moving past phronesis: clinical reasoning in person-centered care Persons over models: shared decision-making for person-centered medicine lifestyle and degeneracy
×
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