Reclaiming Pluralism and Decolonising Medical Anthropological Knowledge Production: A Case Reflection on Traditional Chinese Medicine
This paper critically examines how Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) is conceptualised within European medical anthropological discourse, revealing the Eurocentric frameworks that dominate the Global North theorisation of medical practices that originate from the Global South context. Through analy...
সংরক্ষণ করুন:
| প্রকাশিত: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/aam, |
|---|---|
| প্রধান লেখক: | |
| বিন্যাস: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| ভাষা: | Anglais |
| প্রকাশিত: |
Archivio antropologico mediterraneo
2026
|
| বিষয়গুলি: | |
| অনলাইন ব্যবহার করুন: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| সংক্ষিপ্ত: | This paper critically examines how Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) is conceptualised within European medical anthropological discourse, revealing the Eurocentric frameworks that dominate the Global North theorisation of medical practices that originate from the Global South context. Through analysing TCM’s reception in Europe, I interrogate ‘medical pluralism’ as a theoretical construct that, whilst ostensibly inclusive, often reinforces biomedical hegemony by positioning other medical traditions as ‘complementary’ or ‘alternative’. The analysis explores how the established Global North epistemic norms of evidence, legitimacy, and scientific validity shape TCM’s selective integration – for instance, where acupuncture gains widespread acceptance through biomedical translation whilst herbal medicine remains marginalised. This differential reception reveals deeper epistemological tensions: TCM’s holistic diagnostic methods and therapeutic rationales resist the reductionist frameworks through which they are evaluated. Moving beyond, this paper advocates for decolonising medical anthropological discourse. This requires more than acknowledging diverse medical traditions; it demands fundamentally restructuring the theoretical and methodological tools through which we understand health, illness, and healing. The paper calls for medical anthropologists to foster epistemologically equitable frameworks that genuinely represent the multiplicity of global healthcare practices. I suggest that only by moving beyond current paradigms that domesticate difference can we develop theoretical approaches adequate to the complexity of contemporary medical knowledge production. |
|---|