The datafication and digitalization of health and medicine has engendered a proliferation of new collaborations between public health institutions and data corporations like Google, Apple, Microsoft and Amazon. Critical perspectives on these new partnerships tend to frame them as an instance of market transgressions by tech giants into the sphere of health and medicine, in line with a “hostile worlds” doctrine that upholds that the borders between market and non-market spheres should be carefully policed. This article seeks to outline the limitations of this common framing for critically understanding the phenomenon of the Googlization of health. In particular, the mobilization of a diversity of non-market value statements in the justification work carried out by actors involved in the Googlization of health indicates the co-presence of additional worlds or spheres in this context, which are not captured by the market vs. non-market dichotomy. It then advances an alternative framework, based on a multiple-sphere ontology that draws on Boltanski and Thevenot’s orders of worth and Michael Walzer’s theory of justice, which I call a normative pragmatics of justice. This framework addresses both the normative deficit in Boltanski and Thevenot’s work and provides an important emphasis on the empirical workings of justice. Finally, I discuss why this framework is better equipped to identify and to address the many risks raised by the Googlization of health and possibly other dimensions of the digitalization and datafication of society.

健康和医学的数据化和数字化催生了公共卫生机构与谷歌、苹果、微软和亚马逊等数据公司之间新合作的激增。对这些新伙伴关系的批判性观点倾向于将它们视为科技巨头市场越界进入健康和医学领域的一个例子，符合“敌对世界”学说，即市场和非市场领域之间的边界应该是仔细监管。本文旨在概述这种共同框架的局限性，以批判性地理解健康谷歌化现象​​。特别是，在参与 Google 健康谷歌化的行为者进行的论证工作中动员了多种非市场价值陈述表明在这种情况下其他世界或领域的共同存在，这些世界或领域没有被市场与非市场所捕获市场二分法。然后，它提出了一个替代框架，该框架基于一个多领域本体论，该本体论借鉴了 Boltanski 和 Thevenot 的价值秩序以及 Michael Walzer 的正义理论，我称之为正义的规范语用学。该框架解决了 Boltanski 和 Thevenot 工作中的规范缺陷，并重点强调了正义的经验运作。最后，