• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Science, Technology and Human Values >'Medical Cannabis' as a Contested Medicine: Fighting Over Epistemology and Morality
【24h】

'Medical Cannabis' as a Contested Medicine: Fighting Over Epistemology and Morality

机译：“医用大麻”作为备受赞誉的药物：对抗认识论和道德

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Few empirical studies have explored how different types of knowledge are associated with diverse objectivities and moral economies. Here, we examine these associations through an empirical investigation of the public policy debate in Israel around medical cannabis (MC), which may be termed a contested medicine because its therapeutic effects, while subjectively felt by users, are not generally recognized by the medical profession. Our findings indicate that beneath the MC debate lie deep-seated issues of epistemology, which are entwined with questions of ethics and morality. Whereas some stakeholder groups viewed evidence-based medicine and mechanical objectivity as the only valid knowledge base, others called for recognition of a particular experience-based knowledge, championing regulatory, administrative, or strong objectivity. Stakeholders' interpretations of what should be considered as ethical courses of (in)action corresponded to their epistemological views, with most criticizing the regulators for relying on regulatory subjectivity instead of objectivity. Our in-depth mapping of this arena allowed us not only to shed light on the emergence of the new entity called "medical cannabis" but also to reexamine the link between epistemology, ethics, and action and to elucidate how heterogeneous groups view the validity and objectivity of knowledge and the interface between medicine, science, and policy.
机译：很少有实证研究探索不同类型的知识如何与各种客观性和道德经济联系在一起。在这里，我们通过对以色列围绕医用大麻（MC）进行的公共政策辩论的实证研究，对这些关联进行了考察，这可以被称为有争议的药品，因为其治疗效果虽然由使用者主观地感受到，但医学界并未普遍认可。我们的发现表明，在MC辩论之下，存在着根深蒂固的认识论问题，这些问题与道德和道德问题交织在一起。一些利益相关者团体将基于证据的医学和机械客观性视为唯一有效的知识库，而其他利益相关者团体则要求承认特定的基于经验的知识，主张监管，行政或强烈的客观性。利益相关者对应作为（不作为）行动的道德过程的解释与他们的认识论观点相对应，大多数人批评监管者是依靠监管的主观性而非客观性。我们对该领域的深入了解，不仅使我们不仅可以了解称为“医用大麻”的新实体的出现，而且可以重新审视认识论，伦理学和行动之间的联系，并阐明异类群体如何看待有效性和知识的客观性以及医学，科学和政策之间的接口。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号