当前位置: X-MOL 学术Sci. Edu. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The Universality of Science and Traditional Chinese Medicine
Science & Education ( IF 2.8 ) Pub Date : 2021-06-25 , DOI: 10.1007/s11191-021-00249-4
Íñigo Ongay de Felipe

This paper represents a philosophical appraisal of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) from the point of view of the philosophy of science. As it is generally the case with other versions of Traditional Medicine, rather than a coherent research program Traditional Chinese Medicine constitutes an array of various techniques and practices coupled with a diversity of very different speculative doctrines regarding the physiological structure of certain body parts as well as the purported etiology of disease and malfunction. This chapter starts off by describing some of the theoretical assumptions on which TCM relies with the aim of casting light on whether they, alongside the clinical techniques TCM encompasses, can significantly be considered as a scientific theory comparable with that of conventional medicine. In so doing the chapter examines a plurality of demarcation criteria between science and non-science coming from various existing philosophical frameworks old and new. While, as will be shown, a wealth of research based on RCTs (randomized control trials) points out that TCM´s degree of effectiveness is low, that is not the point this paper intends to make. Instead of such an empirical criticism, the author sustains a comparably stronger epistemic contention, namely: even if the clinical results of TCM fared better than they actually do, that observation alone would not be a good reason to consider this branch of traditional medicine as a scientifically respectable endeavor.



中文翻译:

科学与中医的普遍性

本文代表了从科学哲学的角度对中医进行哲学评价。与其他版本的传统医学通常情况相同,而不是一个连贯的研究计划 传统中医学包含一系列不同的技术和实践,再加上关于某些身体部位的生理结构的各种非常不同的推测学说,以及所谓的疾病和功能障碍的病因。本章首先描述了中医所依赖的一些理论假设,目的是阐明这些假设与中医所涵盖的临床技术是否可以被视为与传统医学相当的科学理论。为此,本章检查了科学与非科学之间的多个划分标准,这些标准来自各种现有的新旧哲学框架。虽然,正如将要显示的,基于 RCT(随机对照试验)的大量研究指出中医的有效性程度较低,但这不是本文打算提出的观点。作者没有进行这样的实证批评,而是支持一个相对更强烈的认知论点,即:即使中医的临床结果比实际情况好,仅凭观察也不能成为将这一传统医学分支视为一个很好的理由。科学上可敬的努力。大量基于 RCT(随机对照试验)的研究指出,中医的有效性程度较低,这不是本文打算提出的观点。作者没有进行这样的实证批评,而是支持一个相对更强烈的认知论点,即:即使中医的临床结果比实际情况好,仅凭观察也不能成为将这一传统医学分支视为一个很好的理由。科学上可敬的努力。大量基于 RCT(随机对照试验)的研究指出,中医的有效性程度较低,这不是本文打算提出的观点。作者没有进行这样的实证批评,而是支持一个相对更强烈的认知论点,即:即使中医的临床结果比实际情况好,仅凭观察也不能成为将这一传统医学分支视为一个很好的理由。科学上可敬的努力。

更新日期:2021-06-25
down
wechat
bug