Dissertation Research: EunJeong Ma: The Herbal Medicine Cabinet -- Controversies Between Western-trained Pharmacists and Oriental Medicine Practitioners in South Korea

这项科学技术研究论文改进补助金向康奈尔大学博士论文水平的学生提供在韩国进行访谈和参与观察的费用。这篇论文是对韩国西医和中医之间围绕草药处方权的争议进行研究。自19世纪末西方医学传入韩国以来，韩医学家和西方药师就围绕中草药的开药权展开了激烈的斗争。双方的冲突在1993年升级，当时《药物法》中有关西方药店传统草药柜的法律条款被废除。药柜包含药品清单，用于组织、分类和储存OM的草药成分，其设计和组织也象征OM传统元素。拟议的研究将追踪争议的发展和演变，并将重点放在草药柜上，这是两个专业之间有争议的边界对象。OM的支持者认为，传统知识是内置在药柜里的，而西方药房的药柜的位置与这些知识是不可比拟的。相比之下，西医的支持者强调可通约性，并将现代医学科学视为验证和利用选定中医实践的基础。鉴于这种情况，拟议的实地研究将侧重于草药柜在药房、医院和传统草药中使用时的不同用途和意义。实地研究还将比较中医和西医如何诊断和治疗疾病，如何与患者互动，如何解释成功。和失败。并设想身体。本文运用科学技术研究领域的不可通约性等关键概念，将橱柜视为一种物质和象征性的客体，在争议的主要各方之间占据了认知和文化的界面。双方之间的纠纷引发了许多关于医疗政策、公共卫生问题和专业管辖权的有趣问题，其中一些问题是韩国独有的。研究方法结合了在一家西医和中医兼用的医院进行的人种学研究，以及对流行文献和档案资料的文献分析。韩国的案例将阐明冲突各方的立场如何不同，例如，药柜是否提供了一个共同的文化点，还是不可通约性知识之间的边界。知识价值的两个广泛来源是，首先，涉及两种医学传统的争议的有趣的，在某种程度上是独特的案例历史的实质性价值，其次，对核心s&s&ts主题的具体案例规范的概念价值：不可通约性，边界对象，贸易区和边界工作。这项研究将在公共卫生政策领域产生更广泛的影响。在包括美国在内的许多国家文化中，传统和西方医疗体系共存（偶尔也会）发生冲突。这项研究将为韩国旨在促进传统治疗系统和西医的政策的影响提供详细的见解，这种见解可能对其他地区类似关系的研究有用。

This Science and Technology Studies Dissertation Improvement Grant requests expenses by a Ph.D. thesis level student at Cornell University to conduct interviews and participant observations in Korea. The dissertation is a study of a controversy between practitioners of Western and traditional medicine in Korea over the right to prescribe herbal remedies. Ever since the late 19th century, when Western medicine (WM) was introduced in Korea, Oriental Medicine (OM) practitioners and Western pharmacists have struggled over the right to prescribe herbal medicines. The conflict between the two parties escalated in 1993, when a legal clause in the Pharmaceutical Law governing the traditional type of herbal medicine cabinet at Western pharmacies was repealed. The herbal medicine cabinet contains a drug inventory that is used to organize, categorize, and store herbal ingredients for OM, and its design and organization also symbolize elements of OM tradition. The proposed research will trace the development and evolution of the controversy, and will focus on the herbal medicine cabinet, which was a contested boundary object located between the two professions. OM proponents contend that traditional knowledge is built into the herbal medicine cabinet, and that the placement of the medicine cabinet in a Western pharmacy is incommensurable with such knowledge. In contrast, WM proponents emphasize commensurability, and view modern medical science as a basis for validating and appropriating selected OM practices. Given this situation, the proposed field research will focus on the diverse uses and meanings of the herbal medicine cabinet when used in pharmacies, at hospitals and in the context of traditional herbal medicine. The field research also will compare how OM and WM practitioners diagnose and treat diseases, interact with patients, account for success. and failure. And conceive of the body. Using key concepts such as incommensurability from the Science & Technology Studies field, the dissertation treats the cabinet as a material and symbolic object that occupies an epistemic and cultural interface between the main parties in the dispute. The disputes between the parties raised many interesting questions about medical policies, public health issues, and professional jurisdiction rights, some of which were unique to Korea. The method of study combines ethnographic research at a hospital that practices both Western and Oriental Medicine, along with documentary analysis of popular and archival sources. The Korean case will elucidate how parties to the conflict differ in their positions about whether, for example, the medicine cabinet provides a point of common culture, or a boundary between incommensurable knowledges. Two broad sources of intellectual merit are, first, the substantive value of an interesting, and to some extent unique, case history of a controversy involving two medical traditions, and, second, a the conceptual value of a case-specific specification of core S&TS themes: incommensurability, boundary-object, trading zone, and boundary-work. The broader impact of the study will be in the area of public health policies. Traditional and Western medical systems co-exist (and occasionally) conflict in many national cultures today, including the US. The study will furnish detailed insight into the impact of Korean policies aiming to promote both traditional healing systems and Western medicine, and such insight may prove useful for studies of similar relationships in other regions.