Analysis of Article 'Science, Technology, and Human Health: The Value of Sts in Medical and Health Humanities Pedagogy"

Introduction

Within the wide complexity of therapeutic and health humanities, there are various ponders that certify few disciplinary that bolster the comprehension of students. One of these is “Science, Technology, and Human Health: The Value of STS in Medical and Health Humanities Pedagogy” written by Julia Knopes. The author contends that science and technology improve students better in medical and health humanities in four particulars implies. The article is enlightening and informative since the author proposes that the STS can extend undergrad and graduate students’ fundamental comprehension in a way that STS offer substance and influence one's encounters of disorders and wellbeing.

Summary

As shown within the article, STS is exceptionally profitable to consider the development of specific disciplinary points of view to students taking the program of therapeutic and health humanities. In addition, the article of Julia Knopes explained the affiliation of the program from the approaches of science and technology studies. The main focus included where STS is expressed to be invaluable to health humanities includes debating the efficient procedure inside the advance of medicine, assessing the meaning of innovation, on how it orients students towards ailments and how it is influenced by societal convictions, measuring the assortment of biomedical epistemologies, in place of expecting biomedicine is one organized information that does not shift over setting, and criticizing predisposition in biomedical preparing, particularly within the degrading women’s voices. The theoretical noteworthiness of the main focuses and association of the STS to the program was assessed at Case Western Reserve University. Moreover, through implies of remarking on how the program can be adjusted in other colleges, it can survey how can STS be blended within the program. Hence, from the arguments, Julia Knopes concluded that enrolling together medical humanities and science and technology studies might offer critical means of being vigilant, adroit, and beneficiary of biomedical care.

Analysis

Within the article, Julia Knopes organizes well the inconspicuous components within the arguments as the supporting points of interest were expressed, at first from the history into the utilizing progression of science. On the primary previously specified advantage of STS to the field of therapeutic and wellbeing humanities, the author expressed that STS disputes the idea of the orderly procedure inside the development in science. Concurring to the paper, “medical anthropologists with STS engage criticizing science progression wherein not all progress is positive”. This deduces that through STS, it makes strides in students’ capability to be comprehensive in overseeing with the orderly way of progression of science. In addition, the author as well stated that biomedical care has uprooted innate healers. This passes on that by looking on the societal events, students may look for further investigation on how science develops that influences biomedicine these days.

In the second argument, STS work contends that progresses design, shapes, and affects how we characterize and respond to ailment and in turn, choose up unused implications given the convictions, practices, and values that encompass their application. Julia Knopes explained that the fetus adoption is considered both adopted and be that as it may be biologically born. This infers that considering the societal guidelines in STS impacts how technology is associated in medication and in this way permits students to center on the patient’s point of view as well due to the results of societal to technology in dealing with instruments. That’s why the argument was compelling and maintained a vital distance from predispositions since the argument gives objectiveness in showing the focal focus and result of having STS within the course

The third argument that shows STS measures the variety of biomedical epistemologies, in place of anticipating biomedicine that does not shift over the setting. The point of Julia Knopes moreover gets across by taking on to account the various ways of knowing ailments. Within the paper, it expressed that atherosclerosis was taken in numerous shapes from patients ‘understanding to radiologists into doctors. Furthermore, this shows a clear and insightful viewpoint that through STS, students may look at the ways in which all coherent data is socially and verifiably created without assuming on the settled ways of biomedical demonstrative.

The final argument stating STS enables criticizing partiality in biomedical preparation, particularly within the downsizing of women’s voices. Agreeing to Julia Knopes, medical anthropologists depict inclinations to authoritative information where within the scope of childbirth, birthing assistants are ladies be that as it may, truly, biomedical specialists have been men. This indicates that in STS approaches, these conditions may allot questioning on the prejudices on how medical knowledge possesses authority and others are toned down. Hence, it appears perceiving information contains a good strategy in inducing how STS may advantage students in mulling over unequal social work in gathering biomedical truth.

Conclusion

Julia Knopes have displayed a point by point, sensible, and insightful information as the author commences on how STS affects the student’s understanding taking up medical and humanities in managing with ailments and wellbeing with diverse symptomatic perspectives. As the paper legitimizes the four benefits of STS to health humanities, I begin to understand that the author basically actuates the association of STS with health humanities for students to comprehend completely the orderly strategy inside the advancement of biomedicine, assess the meaning of technology, on how it orients students towards ailments, assess the assortment of biomedical epistemologies other than expecting settled biomedicine diagnostics, and criticizing prejudice in biomedical training and science, particularly in disempowering women’s voices. Along these lines, this article is especially valuable to understudies of restorative and health humanities since it offers information that may well be profitable in comprehending broadly with illnesses and wellbeing through science and technology.