Laura Hall Amy
Duke University Divinity School, Durham, North Carolina 27708-0968, USA.
J Med Philos. 2006 Jun;31(3):285-304. doi: 10.1080/03605310600713008.
The barrier to global health most often noted in Western discourse is the enduring disparity of access to medical technologies. This assessment of the circumstances in global health fits well within a bioethic centered on the equitable distribution of access to medical goods. Yet through an interrogative consideration of two episodes in the marketing of progress, namely the Century of Progress Exposition in Chicago (1933-1934) and one post-war spin on atomic development in the National Geographic, I suggest that the language of medical advancement continues to trade on a division between civilized, rational, scientifically developed peoples and the atavism of peoples by whom Western science gauges its progress. I recommend unremittingly self-critical attention to the dynamics of language and legitimization used within the Western academy by those who seek ostensibly to be of use in regions (powerfully) labeled as "developing."
西方话语中最常提到的全球健康障碍是获取医疗技术方面长期存在的差距。这种对全球健康状况的评估很符合以医疗产品公平分配为中心的生物伦理。然而,通过对进步营销中的两个事件进行质疑性思考,即芝加哥的进步世纪博览会(1933 - 1934年)以及《国家地理》中关于战后原子发展的一个版本,我认为医学进步的语言继续基于一种区分:一方是文明、理性、科学发达的民族,另一方是西方科学用以衡量自身进步的那些民族的原始状态。我建议那些表面上旨在为被(强有力地)标记为“发展中”地区发挥作用的人,要始终不懈地对西方学术界使用的语言动态和正当化进行自我批评性关注。