IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v25y1987i11p1213-1218.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Theoretical tensions in biopsychosocial medicine

Author

Listed:
  • Armstrong, David

Abstract

Orthodoxy traditionally manages to control the potential threat from the unorthodox by a strategy of either marginalisation or incorporation. Having for so long marginalised the social sciences, biomedicine now seeks to incorporate them in a new biopsychosocial alliance. The social sciences should resist such blandishments and, rather than act in complicity with biomedicine, be free to pursue a more critical role in exposing the theoretical and empirical inconsistencies in the biomedical model.

Suggested Citation

  • Armstrong, David, 1987. "Theoretical tensions in biopsychosocial medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 25(11), pages 1213-1218, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:25:y:1987:i:11:p:1213-1218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(87)90368-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. May, Carl & Rapley, Tim & Moreira, Tiago & Finch, Tracy & Heaven, Ben, 2006. "Technogovernance: Evidence, subjectivity, and the clinical encounter in primary care medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 1022-1030, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:25:y:1987:i:11:p:1213-1218. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.