Department of Sociology and Lyman Briggs College, Michigan State University, 919 East Shaw Lane, Rm E-35, East Lansing, MI 48825, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2014 Apr;107:100-4. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.02.011. Epub 2014 Feb 12.
Over the last half century, changes in the structure of medicine have shifted the relationship between the profession of medicine and social institutions. In this paper, I uncover ideas for retheorizing this relationship by analyzing a review by Georg Simmel that has been previously overlooked. In an analytical overview and critical appraisal of Simmel's text, I argue that he considered preventative medical knowledge more influential when this knowledge is located outside the physician-patient relationship. Simmel suggests we need to identify how such knowledge is injected into medical and non-medical settings by the mixtures of professional-, market-, and state-based institutions governing medicine, and pay attention to how these institutions shift. His goals show continuity with a social medicine movement in Germany previously thought to be stalled, and are unique too in their focus on targeting institutions over individuals. Through a close analysis of Simmel's ideas, we can see the relationship of public health with social structural studies of medicine in theoretically innovative ways.
在过去的半个世纪里，医学结构的变化改变了医学专业和社会机构之间的关系。在本文中，我通过分析一个以前被忽视的格奥尔格·齐美尔的评论，揭示了重新理论化这种关系的思路。在对西美尔文本的分析性概述和批判性评价中，我认为，当这种知识位于医患关系之外时，他认为预防医学知识更具影响力。西美尔认为，我们需要确定由管理医学的专业、市场和国家机构的混合体将这种知识注入医疗和非医疗环境中，并注意这些机构如何转变。他的目标与之前被认为停滞不前的德国社会医学运动具有连续性，而且他的目标也很独特，专注于针对机构而不是个人。通过对西美尔思想的深入分析，我们可以从理论创新的角度看待公共卫生与医学社会结构研究之间的关系。
