Kellehear A
Department of Social and Policy Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Palliat Med. 2009 Jul;23(5):388-97. doi: 10.1177/0269216309104858. Epub 2009 May 28.
This review compares and contrasts the major reoccurring themes in two sources of research literature - social studies of dying and human suffering. The purpose of such a comparison is to employ the major insights of each field as a useful method of critically evaluating the insights of the other. Critical exchanges and comparisons between the research area of dying studies and on human suffering have been modest to date. This article will explain that the experience of dying benefits from being situated and analysed in a broader context of cultural experience, as suggested by the theory and study of human suffering. Conversely, the theory and methods involved in studies of human suffering can gain from a mortal view of vulnerability, grief, social ambiguity and identity changes characteristic of experiences at the end of life.
本综述比较并对比了两类研究文献中反复出现的主要主题——关于死亡与人类苦难的社会学研究。这样做的目的是运用每个领域的主要见解，作为批判性评估另一个领域见解的有用方法。迄今为止，死亡研究领域与人类苦难研究领域之间的批判性交流和比较并不多。本文将说明，正如人类苦难理论和研究所表明的，死亡体验得益于在更广泛的文化体验背景中进行定位和分析。相反，人类苦难研究中涉及的理论和方法可以从对生命末期经历所特有的脆弱性、悲伤、社会模糊性和身份变化的必死视角中获益。
