Suvremena medicina (p)ostaje puka 'znanost o tijelu' ili 'znanost o bolestima'
| Autor: | Živka Staničić |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | chorvatština |
| Rok vydání: | 2003 |
| Předmět: | |
| Zdroj: | Revija za sociologiju Volume 34 Issue 3-4 |
| ISSN: | 1846-7954 0350-154X |
| Popis: | Za razliku od općeprihvaćenog, samo-po-sebi-razumljivog shvaćanja po kojem status dopustivog problema (i)li jedine predmetne oblasti (i)li navlastitog zadatka suvremene medicine ima isključivo bolest, u radu se iznosi odlučujući stav: ključni pojmovni par medicine čine zdravlje i bolest; i jedan i drugi pojam uzajamno se objašnjavaju, “otvarajući mnogostruke i plodne putove” medicinskom istraživanju i medicinskom djelovanju. Slijedi kritički osvrt na dvije najčešće korištene strategije uz pomoć kojih suvremena medicina pokušava opravdati svoju usredotočenost isključivo na bolest: određenjem zdravlja “apstraktnim”, “eluzivnim”, “metafizičkim” pojmom koji treba pripustiti isključivo filozofima i teolozima, te određenje zdravlja antitezom bolesti, “s onu stranu” bolesti. Koristeći se Husserlovom teorijskom utemeljujućom točkom o tome da do “prave” krize neke znanosti dolazi tek onda kada “postaje upitan čitav način na koji je ona postavila svoju zadaću i za nju izgradila svoju metodiku”, u radu se nastoji argumentirano dokazati da je suvremena medicina zapala u “pravu” krizu (usprkos njezinim stalnim i spektakularnim uspjesima), i to ne samo zato jer je postao upitan čitav način na koji je ona postavila svoju zadaću (ovladati svim bolestima), već i zato jer je postao upitan način na koji se ta zadaća misli ostvariti (isključivo u okvirima prirodnoznanstvene paradigme koja je iznjedrila iluziju o specifičnoj etiologiji svake bolesti). In contrast to the universally accepted and comprehensible view defining the status of “allowable problem” and/or one subject area and/or thesis that the key objective of modern medicine is exclusively disease, this paper is based on the fundamental premise that the key set of concepts in medicine is health and disease. Both the concepts are being explained not separately but as an inseparable unity, which in turn “opens multiple and fertile ways” to medical research and medical activities. This is followed by a critical review of the two most frequently applied strategies which modern medicine adopts in trying to justify its exclusive focus on disease: defining health as an “abstract”, “elusive” and “metaphysical” notion, which should be dealt with exclusively by philosophers and theologians, and defining health as the condition in complete antithesis to disease, as something “beyond” disease. Applying Husserl’s theoretical key premise that the “real” crisis of a science starts only when the “complete way in which its objective has been set up and its methodological approach adopted” becomes questionable, this paper tries to prove, presenting well-founded arguments, that scientific medicine is facing a “real” crisis (in spite of its continuous and spectacular breakthroughs). This crisis is due to the fact that not only the way in which it has defined its mission (curing all the diseases) has become controversial, but also because the methods of realizing this task have become questionable (exclusively within the scope of scientific paradigm that created illusion about the specific etiology of each single disease. The developments and major breakthroughs in molecular biology have resulted in a new standpoint that the newly discovered gene, its presence or absence, causes a specific disease). |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|