[摘要] Neither Donkey nor Horse: Medicine in the Struggle over China's Modernity

Title：Neither Donkey nor Horse: Medicine in the Struggle over China's Modernity
Author：Sean Hsiang-lin Lei
Publisher：University Of Chicago Press
Publication Date：2014-09-09

重點摘錄：

 （前情提要，追求科學化，所以針灸啦、祝由啦，都慢慢在科學化過程中被忽略，好像具有科學化價值的，只有具有強大臨床經驗的藥...）

在討論陸淵雷等人的科學化中醫的脈絡中，作者提到自己書名的源由，主要是因為該詞為行動者使用的範疇，其次則是因為hybrid的概念太過樂觀，不能傳達恥辱意涵，所以使用非驢非馬醫，或者雜種醫的說法，來描寫中醫被迫在科學想像底下，追求自身科學化的困境：

   Let me make explicit my reasons for translating the idea of "neither donkey nor hor horse medicine(非驢非馬醫)"as "mongrel medicine"（雜種醫）rather than as the more positive-sounding "hybrid medicine." First of all, unlike the concept of hybrid medicine, mongrel medicine is an actors' category. As critics of Chinese medicine used neither donkey nor horse" medicine and "mongrel medicine" interchangeably, these expressions were meant to indicate a double betrayal of two pure parental traditions. 

　This strong negative connotation leads to my second point: As an actors' category, "neither donkey nor horse" was not a term of self-identity for traditional practitioners but a derogatory device imposed by critics of Chinese medicine. In contrast to this strong negative connotation, the postcolonial concept of hybridity was meant to emphasize "the hybridized nature of post-colonial culture as a strength rather than a weakness."(註84) As a result, the related concept of hybrid medicine cannot serve my purpose of conveying the humiliating constraints imposed upon the advocateds of integrating the two systems of medicine by their critics. It is for the sake of converying the derogatory sense of the term "neither donkey nor horse" thatI have decided to paraphrase it as mongrel medicine. (頁162)

下兩段解釋雜種醫學的說法，具有構成及壓抑的辨證關係，既與現代性論述相關連，以科學改造中醫；但另一方面，也使中醫與科學的交互滋養關係不可能，因為科學優位，使得中醫無從發展，像騾一樣，不具生產力，沒有延續的可能性。
   The notion of mongrel medicine and the project of scientizing Chinese medicine can be said to have existed in a dialectic of constituion and suppression. The relationship between them was mutually constitutive, because the strange creation of mongrel medicine would never have become a desirable objective for traditional practitioners if tthe Scientization of Chinese Medicine had not been promoted by the Nationalist state and thereby accepted by competing parties as a truce in the battle over Chinese medicine's future in the first place. It was this goal of scientization that force traditional practitioners to take seriously the concept of science and its related discourse of modernity, such as Yu Yan's tripartite characterization of Chinese medicine, in their endeavors to reform Chinese medicine. In this sense, their reform efforts were modernist by nature and thereby distinctively different from the earlier, premodernist syncretism represented by 唐宗海.  (頁163)
    On the other hand, the relationship between them was also suppressive because it was the very idea of science (of scientific biomedicine) that made it difficult to imagine a productive crossbreeding between Chinese medicine and biomedicine. The simple act of mixing the two styles of medicine might not produce a monster, but the idea of crossbreeding science with its alien other was seen as amounting to blasphemy(褻瀆)(註89). This assumed impossibility justifies the characterization of this new medicine as "neither donkey nor horse." Just like the mule, which is not capable of reproducing itself, mongrel medicine, while vigorous in appearance, would never be able to carry on by itself as a valuable living tradition. Its popularity called for the derogatory use of the concept of mongrel medicine to emotionalize the potential danger of transgression, a danger that actually originated in the project of scientizing Chinese medicine. To summarize, it was because the two contending parties embraced the project of Scientizing Chinse medicine as a way to bring a truce to their struggle that mongrel medicine had become a popular, desirable, though seemingly impossible project for traditional pratitioners and a potent danger for biomedical practitioners. (頁163-4)

目錄見下：Book Contents：
1.Introduction 
When Chinese Medicine Encountered the State
Beyond the Dual History of Tradition and Modernity
Toward a Coevolutionary History
China’s Modernity
The Discourse of Modernity
Neither Donkey nor Horse
Conventions 

2. Sovereignty and the Microscope: The Containment of the Manchurian Plague, 1910–11 
Not Believing That “This Plague Could Be Infectious”
Pneumonic Plague versus Bubonic Plague
“The Most Brutal Policies Seen in Four Thousand Years”
Challenges from Chinese Medicine: Hong Kong versus Manchuria
Chuanran: Extending a Network of Infected Individuals
Avoiding Epidemics
Joining the Global Surveillance System
Conclusion: The Social Characteristics of the Manchurian Plague

關鍵字：滿州鼠疫、伍連德、顯微鏡、公共治理（衛生防疫體制）、以人為媒介的傳染病、國家主權。出於日俄在滿清的邊境問題，滿清利用顯微鏡建構鼠疫防治的公共衛生體制，也劃出國家的主權。

3. Connecting Medicine with the State: From Missionary Medicine to Public Health, 1860–1928 
Missionary Medicine
Western Medicine in Late Qing China versus Meiji Japan
The First Generation of Chinese Practitioners of Western Medicine
Western Medicine as a Public Enterprise
“Public Health: Time Not Ripe for Large Work,” 1914–1924
The Ministry of Health and the Medical Obligations of Modern Government, 1926–27
Conclusion

4. Imagining the Relationship between Chinese Medicine and Western Medicine, 1890–1928 
Converging Chinese and Western Medicine in the Late 1890s
Non-Identity between the Meridian Channels and the Blood Vessels
Yu Yan and the Tripartition of Chinese Medicine
To Avoid the Place of Confrontation
Ephedrine and Scientific Research on Nationally Produced Drugs
Inventing an Empirical Tradition of Chinese Medicine
Conclusion

5. The Chinese Medical Revolution and the National Medicine Movement 
The Chinese Medical Revolution
Controversy over Legalizing Schools of Chinese Medicine
Abolishing Chinese Medicine: The Proposal of 1929
The March Seventeenth Demonstration
The Ambivalent Meaning of Guoyi
The Delegation to Nanjing
Envisioning National Medicine
Conclusion

6. Visualizing Health Care in 1930s Shanghai 
Reading a Chart of the Medical Environment in Shanghai
Western Medicine: Consolidation and Boundary-Drawing
Chinese Medicine: Fragmentation and Disintegration 

中醫：異質構成：碎片與未整合。
Systematizing Chinese Medicine
Conclusion

7.Science as a Verb: Scientizing Chinese Medicine and the Rise of Mongrel Medicine
The Institute of National Medicine
The Chinese Scientization Movement
The Polemic of Scientizing Chinese Medicine: Three Positions
Embracing Scientization and Abandoning Qi-Transformation
Rejecting Scientization
Reassembling Chinese Medicine: Acupuncture and Zhuyou Exorcism
The Challenge of “Mongrel Medicine”
Conclusion

8. The Germ Theory and the Prehistory of “Pattern Differentiation and Treatment Determination” 
Do You Recognize the Existence of Infectious Diseases?
Notifiable Infectious Disease
Unifying Nosological Nomenclature and Translating Typhoid Fever
Incorporating the Germ Theory into Chinese Medicine
Pattern versus Disease
A Prehistory of “Pattern Differentiation and Treatment Determination”
Conclusion

9. Research Design as Political Strategy: The Birth of the New Antimalaria Drug Changshan 
Changshan as a Research Anomaly
Scientific Research on Nationally Produced Drugs
Stage One: Overcoming the Barrier to Entry
Stage Two: Re-networking Changshan
Two Research Protocols: 1–2–3–4–5 versus 5–4–3–2–1
Research Protocol as Political Strategy
Conclusion: The Politics of Knowledge and the Regime of Value

10. State Medicine for Rural China, 1929–1949 
Defining China’s Medical Problem
Discovering Rural China
The Ding County Model of Community Medicine
State Medicine and the Chinese Medical Association
State Medicine and Local Self-Government
The Issue of Eliminating Village Health Workers
Chinese Medicine for Rural China

11. Conclusion: Thinking with Modern Chinese Medicine 
Medicine and the State
Creation of Values
Medicine and China’s Modernity: Nationalist versus Communist
Chinese Medicine and Science and Technology Studies
Acknowledgments