2003年美加等地相繼爆發狂牛症疫情後，我國即採取相應措施，禁止疫區相關肉製品的進口。在疫情受到控制之後，我國也開始逐步鬆綁對美國牛肉的管制，並於2009年與美國簽訂「台美牛肉議定書」。此議定書進一步放寬限制，允許帶骨牛肉與牛肉內臟輸台。消息一出，眾皆譁然。為回應民意，立法院遂於議定書簽訂後的兩個月，火速三讀修正食品衛生管理法，明令禁止頭骨、腦、眼睛、脊髓、絞肉、內臟等六項高風險部位進口。此禁令的立法意旨是希望藉由提高保護水平，來達成增進全民健康的目的，並最終收到定紛止爭之效。未料，修法過後爭議非但沒能止息，反而延伸出美牛風暴的案外案，即本文所討論的：美牛內臟爭議。不管是學界、政界和輿論界，各方對諸如牛舌、牛睪丸、牛鞭等部位，到底是不是食品衛生管理法中所明令禁止的「內臟」發生爭議。相關風險評估報告的定義欠缺與主管機關前後不一的發言，也讓美牛內臟的指涉範圍，呈現眾說紛紜的狀態。為釐清此內臟事限論的政策意涵，分析有限論對未來類似爭議的啟發。件引發的問題，本文擬採取科技與社會（Science, Technology and Society，簡稱STS）學門中愛丁堡學派（Edinburgh School）的有限論（finitism）觀點來分析此問題，希望揭示出內臟等概念及意義，本來便是不固定的；除此之外，本文也嘗試討論有限論的政策意涵，分析有限論對未來類似爭議的啟發。

In October 2009, the Taiwanese government signed a protocol with the US. In this protocol, Taiwan agreed to lift all its BSE-related bans on the US beef. This decision however invited bitter opposition and brought increased pressure on the Legislative Yuan (the Taiwanese Parliament). Two months after the protocol signed, the Legislative Yuan amended the Act Governing Food Sanitation and reintroduced some BSE preventative measures, one of which is banned some internal organ parts from importation. This amendment however provoked an even bitter controversy: whether a cow's tongue, tail, penis, testicles, etc fall into the regulated category of internal organs or the unregulated ＂offal＂ group. This article applies the concept of finitism to analyzing the aforementioned controversy. It argues that meanings are always under creation and recreation; therefore there are no meanings that can be taken for granted. For finitists, meanings of a word or concept, say offal, can never be ＂fixed＂ by decisions or definitions. Given that finitism raises profound questions about the nature of knowledge and meaning, it is argued that finitism is a new departure point for refocusing our regulatory thinking.