首页> 外文期刊>Yisahag - Korean Journal of Medical History >Trend and Prospect of Study on Chinese Medical History - Diversification of the Study on Medical History Study Through Integration and Communication -
【24h】

Trend and Prospect of Study on Chinese Medical History - Diversification of the Study on Medical History Study Through Integration and Communication -

机译:中国医学史研究趋势与前景 - 通过整合和沟通研究研究历史研究的多样化 -

获取原文
       

摘要

This study has focused on studying Chinese medical history for the past 10 years (2010-2019). There has been no overall introduction to how the study of Chinese medical history has been carried out so far in Korea. To understand the trend for the recent 10 years, understanding of the period before that is needed. This study had classified the study trend of Chinese medical history from the 1950s when the study of Chinese medical history started in full swing until the last 10 years into the following three periods: First period: internal study period on Chinese medical history (the 1950s-1980s) Second period: external study period on Chinese medical history (the 1980s-1990s) Third period: diverse study period on Chinese medical history through integration and communication (2010-2019) There can be an opinion that various studies by each period have not been adequately reflected, and the classification has been excessively simplified. For example, the internal study has been considerably performed in the second period, and the consciousness of conflict between the internal study and external study remains in the third period. Nonetheless, the keywords that connote each period's characteristics for the past 70 years are considered the keywords presented above. The study of Chinese medical history has mainly placed importance on the modern times. Indeed, no change has been present as well. However, the fact that the study on the Chinese pre-modern medical history in Korean academia for the past 10 years has quantitatively grown from just a comparison of the number of papers can be identified. Also, the researchers and study themes have been confirmed to be diversified. In the past, ancient Chinese medicine was understood as a connection between Taoism and medicine. The environmental history researchers dealt with the connection between natural disasters and diseases, and just a few studies in the fields of medicinal herb distribution and the viewpoint of the body were carried out. Meanwhile, studies from the pre-Qin Dynasty to the Han Dynasty were carried out based on new data such as the archaeological relics and bamboo and wooden slips in the Korean academia for the past 10 years. Discovering new data is undoubtedly a driving force to activate studies. Studies on the Tang Dynasty Medical System and laws based on 'Chunsungryeong' are significant achievements connecting the Qin Dynasty & Han Dynasty and the Song Dynasty & Yuan Dynasty. Identification of each period's medical system in medical history is the most essential thing, and the combination of environment and medical history is conducted. It is significant to examine medical history from the viewpoint of the academic disciplines' integration. Approaching medical history from the female viewpoint has already started in the U.S., Europe, and Taiwan, and it is nice that such a study has been conducted in Korean academia. There are not many researchers on Chinese medical history in Korean academia. As several researchers have led the study, the study's concentration on specific periods or specific themes cannot be denied. The integration of systematic research achievements from the pre-Qin Dynasty until the Qing Dynasty is still minimal. Specifically, the study on pre-modern medical history targets a more extensive period than the study on modern medical history; therefore, researchers' density is low. This is why the possibility of intersection is not high in the period, region, and theme between researchers. This can be the source of an evaluation that study on medical history chain is sparse. It is wistful that the study continuity or systematic research is lacking. To overcome such a limitation, existing researchers need to conduct collaborative joint planning and research centered on particular themes through cooperation. They need to complement the study's sparse part in medical history through multidisciplinary co-research. Beyond the research centered on country study history, attempts to understand history as global history are being carried out. Studies on the exchange and interrelations between Western medicine and Chinese medicine have been performed in Chinese medical history. Nonetheless, studies on the exchange and interrelations of medical knowledge, medical systems, medicinal herbs, medical books, medical workforce, and diseases (epidemics) from global history are insufficient. Studies on a medical history that started from Chinese science and technology development history in the 1950s are developing to discuss one theme diversely. Plenty of studies on Chinese medical history need to be performed in various fields, including environmental history, the history of women, archeology, humanities, humanities therapy, integrated medical humanities, medical literature, medical theory, and medical system, which are the traditional fields.
机译:这项研究的重点是研究中国医学史在过去的10年(2010年至2019年)。目前还没有全面介绍如何中国医学史的研究已经在韩国迄今进行的。要了解近10年来的趋势,那就是需要之前的期间理解。这项研究已分类从20世纪50年代中国医学史研究的发展趋势时,如火如荼的开始了中国医学史的研究,直到最近10年分为以下三个阶段:第一期:内部研究期间对中国医学史(在1950s- 20世纪80年代)第二期:外部研究期间对中国医学史(20世纪80年代,90年代)三段:通过集成和通信(2010-2019)不同的研究期间对中国的病史可以有一种意见认为,通过各个时期各种研究都没有得到充分的反射,而分类被过度简化。例如,内部研究已大大在第二期间进行,并且内部研究和外部研究之间冲突的意识保持在第3期。尽管如此,意味着每个时期的对过去70年的特征关键字被认为是上述关键字。中国医学史的研究主要放在近代重要性。事实上,没有任何变化是现在。然而,在韩国学术界对中国的前现代医学历史近10年的研究从定量只是论文数量的增长相比,这个事实可以认定。此外,研究人员和研究主题已被证实是多样化的。在过去,中国古代医药被理解为道教和药品之间的连接。环境史研究处理自然灾害和疾病,而只是少数研究之间的药材分布的领域并进行了身体的角度来看的连接。同时,从先秦到汉代的研究基础上,如考古文物和简牍在韩国学术界在过去的10年新的数据进行了。发现新数据无疑是一种动力,激活的研究。基于“Chunsungryeong”研究唐代医疗制度和法律是连接秦朝和汉朝和宋朝和元朝显著的成就。在医学史上各个时期的医疗系统的鉴定是最本质的东西,环境和病史的组合进行。这是显著从学科整合的角度出发检查的病史。从女性的观点接近的病历已经开始在美国,欧洲,台湾,这是很好的,这样的研究在学术界韩国已经进行。有没有在中国医学史上许多研究人员在韩国学术界。正如一些研究人员领导了这项研究,该研究对特定时期或特定主题的浓度不能否认。从先秦系统的研究成果,直到清代的整合仍然是最小的。具体而言,对前现代医学史研究的目标更广泛的时间比现代医学史的研究;因此,研究人员的密度是低的。这就是为什么交集的可能性不是在此期间,区域和研究人员之间的主题高。这可以是一个评估的来源,病史链的研究很少。这是渴望的,研究的连续性和系统性的研究缺乏。为了克服这样的限制,现有的研究人员需要进行协作的联合规划和研究,通过合作集中在特定的主题。他们需要通过多学科的合作研究在医学史上,以补充该研究的稀疏部分。除了研究国家研究中心的历史,试图了解历史,世界历史正在开展。西医和中国医学的研究上的交流和相互关系已经在中国医学史上被执行。然而,在交换的研究和医学知识,医疗系统,药材,医疗书籍,医疗工作人员的相互关系,以及全球历史疾病(疫病)是不够的。正在研究病史,从中国科学技术发展史20世纪50年代开始发展到多样讨论一个主题。对中国医学史需要研究大量的在各个领域,包括环境史,妇女学,考古学,哲学,人文科学治疗的历史,综合人文医学,医学文献,医学理论和医疗系统,这是传统领域进行。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号