《黄帝内经》及涉医简帛中的“风”相关病名病因比较研究

总结先秦两汉涉医简帛及《黄帝内经》中有关“风”的疾病语言，总结病名和病因，分析其认知中介物和认知方法。涉医简帛中极少以“风”字作病名及病因，而在《黄帝内经》则有广泛应用，同时内涵亦有所不同。《内经》在疾病的定义已经转化成具有明显的病理学意识；命名和病因中都渗透了以身体感及气论相结合理解疾病的方法学。《黄帝内经》并非单纯“归纳各家医学”，而是具备独特的自然哲学观念。“六气致病说”并非在涉医简帛中属于流行及成熟的观点；《黄帝内经》做出范式转变，使“风”摆脱鬼神之说。藉“气论”综合身心自然的因素，确立感知身体及疾病的方法，揉合身体感观与客观现象。并使关注点从解剖为主的身体，转化成“现象的身体”；继而把疾病发生和传变的“空间”及诠释均依托“现象的身体”建构。

The article concluded about the naming of "wind" in etiology and disease naming, analyzed the difference on the methodology and etiology between Huangdi Neijing and the medical bamboosilk literature. And we found that 'Six-Qi-Etiology' is not common and sophisticated in the bamboosilk literature at that time, and "wind" is related to ghost sickness. While Huangdi Neijing excluded ghost sickness and have a complete "SixQi-Etiology". As a result, we believe that Huangdi Neijing is just not simply summarize all the medial literature at that time, it is based on a special natural philosophy basis. The definition of disease is transformed into pathological based, the method of understanding is changing into the combination of "qi" and embodiment. Using "qi" as a medium to fuse up body-mind-nature. And the perception subject is a combination of "mind" and " body". Making the focus changing from the "anatomical body" into the "phenomenological body".