From one of the links there's this paper, which I'm in two minds about. It's a social constructionist paper, and I find the way social constructionists use language to be rant-inducing, particularly the way they equivocate between things and ideas of things. With that particular paper, if they did a search-and-replace, to turn every occurrence of "illness" into "illness-concept" or "illness-label", then IMO it would be vastly improved. ETA, oops, no, you can't do a search-and-replace job like that. "Stigmatized illness can make an illness much more difficult to treat and manage." - I'm pretty sure the second "illness" isn't being used to refer to an illness-concept.
Miscellaneous. Eclectic. Random. Perhaps markedly literate, or at least suffering from the compulsion to read any text that presents itself, including cereal boxes.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-23 08:36 pm (UTC)From one of the links there's this paper, which I'm in two minds about. It's a social constructionist paper, and I find the way social constructionists use language to be rant-inducing, particularly the way they equivocate between things and ideas of things. With that particular paper, if they did a search-and-replace, to turn every occurrence of "illness" into "illness-concept" or "illness-label", then IMO it would be vastly improved. ETA, oops, no, you can't do a search-and-replace job like that. "Stigmatized illness can make an illness much more
difficult to treat and manage." - I'm pretty sure the second "illness" isn't being used to refer to an illness-concept.