Caponi Sandra
Departamento de Saúde, Pública da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. SC Brasil.
Hist Cienc Saude Manguinhos. 2003 Jan-Apr;10(1):113-49. doi: 10.1590/s0104-59702003000100004.
In order to understand the novelty, in theoretical and epistemelogical terms, of the emergence of tropical medicine, we analyse two models of research represented by the Pasteur de Ultramar Institute and the London School of Tropical Medicine. We seek to understand which arguments and concepts come into play in their discourse; in what way they construct their protocols for research; how these protocols, concepts and arguments are similar and different; indeed, whether it is possible to speak of something new, epistemologically speaking, or of the incommensurability of tropical medicine with the medicine inherited from Pasteur and the medical tradition concerned with disease in hot climates.
为了从理论和认识论角度理解热带医学兴起的新颖之处，我们分析了以巴斯德海外研究所和伦敦热带医学院为代表的两种研究模式。我们试图理解在它们的论述中哪些论点和概念发挥了作用；它们以何种方式构建研究方案；这些方案、概念和论点如何异同；实际上，从认识论角度而言，是否有可能谈及新事物，或者热带医学与从巴斯德传承而来的医学以及关注炎热气候下疾病的医学传统是否不可通约。
