Doctoral Dissertation Research: Cholera and Quacks: The Struggle Over 19th-Century Medical Knowledge

这个科学，技术社会博士论文研究改进补助金旨在探索霍乱的科学发展及其与世纪美国医学专业化的关系。在此期间，正统医学经历了专业权威的深刻转变。尽管在19世纪中期，另类医学团体成功地挑战了一些机构的正统观念，但在世纪之交，正统医生在细菌学方面重新定义了他们的专业知识，创造了一个强大的、自主的职业。这个项目试图回答正统的医生如何能够巩固他们的专业权威，这已经失去了在19世纪初，在细菌学范式。论文项目探讨霍乱作为一个“认知竞赛”的案例研究，其中集体行动者与竞争的范式在各种机构的承认斗争。在这场知识竞赛中，比霍乱知识更重要的是科学医学的定义（即如何以及由谁获得合法的医学知识）。通过对相关机构和医疗团体的档案记录的研究，该项目追踪了霍乱概念的转变，以便：1）重建认识竞赛的演变，2）阐明不同医学派别传播的认识论，3）检查用于促进这些认识立场的文化策略的有效性。它假设正统医学在公共机构中被击败，因为替代医学教派的透明认识论与这些公共机构产生了更好的共鸣。正规军只是通过将辩论与公众监督隔离开来，说服一小群精英（即洛克菲勒和卡内基基金会）支持他们在政府机构之外的专业项目，才控制了霍乱的定义。 本研究挑战传统的知识传播模式，系统地调查的作用，超科学论战。 本研究借由引入知识竞赛的概念，探讨公共机构如何获得、验证与合法化疾病的科学知识。

This Science, Technology & Society Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant seeks to explore the scientific development of cholera and its relationship to the professionalization of medicine in the nineteenth century United States. During this period, orthodox medicine experienced a profound shift in professional authority. Although alternative medical groups successfully challenged orthodoxy in a number of institutions during the mid-1800s, at the turn of the century, orthodox physicians redefined their expertise under bacteriology, creating a powerful, autonomous profession. This project seeks to answer how orthodox physicians were able to consolidate their professional authority, which had been lost in the early 1800s, under the bacteriological paradigm. The dissertation project examines cholera as a case study of an "epistemic contest" where collective actors with competing paradigms struggle for recognition in various institutions. More than knowledge on cholera, at stake in this epistemic contest was the definition scientific medicine (i.e. how and by whom legitimate medical knowledge should be attained). Through a study of archival records from relevant institutions and medical groups, the project traces shifting conceptions of cholera in order to: 1) reconstruct the evolution of the epistemic contest, 2) elucidate the epistemologies propagated by different medical sects, and 3) examine the efficacy of the cultural strategies used to promote these epistemic positions. It hypothesizes that orthodox medicine was defeated in public institutions because the transparent epistemologies of alternative medical sects resonated better with these public institutions. Regulars only achieved control over the definition of cholera by insulating the debate from public scrutiny, convincing a small group of elites (i.e. the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations) to support their professional project outside of government institutions. This research challenges traditional diffusion models of knowledge by systematically investigating the role of extra-scientific polemics. By introducing the concept of the epistemic contest, this research explores how scientific knowledge of disease is obtained, verified, and legitimated within public institutions.