Part One: Identifications 5pts x 6 IDs = 30%For each of the six concepts below, please provide a brief explanation, describing what the term means. Please also provide an example from our course materials (readings, documentaries/clips, lectures, slides) that provide an illustration of/help to elaborate or explain each concept.1.) Reification
2.) Eugenics
3.) Genetic Fallacy
4.) Reflexivity –
5.) Embodied Expertise –
6.) Medicalization –
Part Two: Short Answer 70% Please choose one (1) of the following two prompts to answer. Aim for approximately 3-4 paragraphs. Please be sure to include a minimum of two specific examples from our course materials that help illustrate or provide evidence for your response.Play to your strengths and happy reflecting!
1.) After our first midterm, we began to look at questions of medical stratification – the hierarchical ranking of individuals and groups of individuals according to various norms and standards. We also examined the ways that biological determinist beliefs and frameworks have influenced certain practices of medical stratification. First, please briefly explain the processes by which medical stratification often occurs – what roles do reification, quantification, and standardization frequently play in processes of medical stratification?Second, how do biological determinist understandings frequently inform said medical stratifications? That is, what beliefs about individuals and groups of individuals are being made such that particular medical stratifications are assumed to be feasible/possible? Finally, what actual or potential limitations or drawbacks (historically and/or currently) result from the deployment of various medical stratifications? Are these limitations or drawbacks inherent to processes of stratification, or do they rather result from misunderstandings or misuses that could be revised and made medically beneficial?Please note: This is not meant as a leading question – please feel free to bring into conversation instances where medical stratification has proven/may prove useful or helpful in addition to noting how medical stratification has gone/can go awry. Regardless of ultimate assessments, please just be sure to fully explain the reasoning of the assessment(s) provided.
2.) One of the central projects of medical sociology involves persistently posing the questions: what counts as objective medical knowledge, who is involved in determining said objective medical knowledge (ideas and practices), and on what basis are medical claims legitimately made (and practiced)? During the last portion of our quarter in particular, we’ve explored the relationship between various understandings of medical expertise and its relationship to lay (non-formal) expertise, trust, authority, and decision making at both the micro and macro scales.
From your perspective, is there a fundamental tension between the exercise of medical expertise and democratic deliberation and decision making? If so, why? If not, why not? In answering this question, please specify what you understand expertise to be. Please discuss a minimum of two distinct examples that speak to your answer. Anyrelevant course material is fair game to use.Please note: It is not obligatory to provide a hard ‘yes’ or hard ‘no’ answer here – one or example may suggest a ‘yes’ answer while another may suggest ‘no.’ Mixing and matching is just fine so long as the reasoning guiding the assessments are provided.
due today at 11 pm.
0 comments