Advertisement

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 169–180 | Cite as

‘The analytic–synthetic distinction and conceptual analyses of basic health concepts’

  • Halvor Nordby
Scientific Contribution

Abstract

Within philosophy of medicine it has been a widespread view that there are important theoretical and practical reasons for clarifying the nature of basic health concepts like disease, illness and sickness. Many theorists have attempted to give definitions that can function as general standards, but as more and more definitions have been rejected as inadequate, pessimism about the possibility of formulating plausible definitions has become increasingly widespread. However, the belief that no definitions will succeed since no definitions have succeeded is an inductive objection, open to realist responses. The article argues that an influential argument from philosophy of language constitutes a more fundamental objection. I use disease as an example and show that this argument implies that if a common understanding of disease can be analysed into a definition, then this is a non-trivial definition. But any non-trivial analysis must be viciously circular: the analysis must presuppose that disease can be defined, but this is what the analysis is supposed to yield as a result. This means, the article concludes, that disease and other controversial health concepts do not have analyses grounded in a common language. Stipulative and contextual definitions can have local significance, but the normative roles of such definitions are at the same time limited.

Keywords

conceptual analysis disease doctor–patient interaction illness normativity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albert, D.A., Munson, R., Resnik, M.D. 1988Reasoning in Medicine: An Introduction to Clinical InferenceJohn Hopkins University PressBaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  2. Boorse, C. 1997‘A Rebuttal on Health’Humber, J.M.Almeder, R.F. eds. What Is Disease?HumanaTotowa, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  3. Burge, T. 1979‘Individualism and the Mental’Uehling, P. eds. Midwest Studies in PhilosophyMinneapolis University PressMinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  4. Burge, T. 1986‘Intellectual Norms and Foundations of Mind’The Journal of Philosophy83697720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burge, T. 1990‘Frege on Sense and Linguistic Meaning’Bell, D.Cooper, N. eds. The Analytical Tradition: Meaning, Thought and KnowledgeBasil BlackwellOxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Campell, E.J.M., Scadding, J.G., Roberts, R.S. 1979‘The Concept of Disease’British Medical Journal2757762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davidson, D. 1984Inquires into Truth and InterpretationClarendon PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  8. Engelhardt, H.T. 1975‘The Concepts of Health and Disease’Engelhardt, H.T.Spicker, S.F. eds. Evaluation and Explanation in the Biomedical SciencesReidelDordrechtGoogle Scholar
  9. Fodor, J. 1987PsychosemanticsMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Freidson, E. 1987Profession of MedicineUniversity of Chicago PressChicagoGoogle Scholar
  11. Guttenplan, S. 1996A Companion to Philosophy of MindBlackwell publishersOxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Harman, G. 1999Reasoning, Meaning and MindOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Helman, C. 1984Culture, Health and IllnessButterworth-HeinemannOxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Hofmann, B. 2001‘Complexity of the Concept of Disease as Shown Through Rival Theoretical Frameworks’Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics22211236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hofmann, B. 2002The Technological Invention of DiseaseOslo University PressOsloGoogle Scholar
  16. Honari, M., Boleyn, T. 1999Health Ecology: Health, Culture and Human–Environment InteractionRoutledgeNew York/LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. Juel-Jensen, U. 1983Sygdomsbegreper i praksisMunksgaardCopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  18. Kripke, S. 1982Wittgenstein on Rules and Private LanguageBasil BlackwellOxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Lupton, D. 1994Medicine as CultureSAGE PublicationsLondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Marinker, J.H. 1975‘Why Make People Patients?’Journal of Medical Ethics18184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nettleton, S. 1995The Sociology of Health and IllnessPolity PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Nordby, H. 2003‘Doctor–Patient-Interaction is Non-holistic’Medicine Health care and philosophy6145152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nordenfelt, L. 1987On the Nature of HealthKluwer Academic PublishersDordrecht/Boston/LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Nordenfelt, L. 1993‘On the Relevance and Importance of the Notion of Disease’Theoretical Medicine141526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nordenfelt, L. 2001Health, Science and Ordinary LanguageRodopiAmsterdam/New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  26. Nordenfelt, L., Twaddle, A. 1993Disease, Illness and Sickness: Three Central Concepts in the Theory of Health. Studies on Health and SocietyLinköping University PressLinköpingGoogle Scholar
  27. Peacocke, C. 1992A Study of ConceptsMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  28. Peacocke, C. 1998‘Implicit Conceptions, Understanding and Rationality’Philosophical Issues94389Google Scholar
  29. Putnam, H. 1962‘The Analytic and the Synthetic’Feigl, H.Maxwell, G. eds. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of ScienceUniversity of Minnesota pressMinneapolis, Minn358397Google Scholar
  30. Putnam, H. 1975Philosophical Papers,Cambridge University Press CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Resnek, L. 1987The Nature of DiseaseRoutledgeLondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Scadding, J.G. 1967‘Diagnosis: The Clinician and the Computer’Lancet2877882PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Quine, W.V. 1953From a Logical Point of ViewHarvard University PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  34. Quine, W.V. 1960Word and ObjectHarvard University pressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  35. Quine, W.V. 1969Ontological Relativity and Other EssaysColombia University PressNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Quine, W.V. 1985‘Two Dogmas of Empiricism’Martinich, A.P. eds. The Philosophy of LanguageOxford University PressNew York/OxfordOriginally published in Quine (1953)Google Scholar
  37. Wittgenstein, L. 1953Philosophical InvestigationsBlackwellOxfordGoogle Scholar
  38. Worrhall, J. and J. Worhall: 2001, ‘Defining Disease: Much ado About Nothing?’, in: A. Tymieniecka and E. Agazzi (eds.), Analecta Husserliana LXXII, pp. 33–55Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health and Social workThe University College of LillehammerNorway
  2. 2.Department of Health Management and Health EconomicsThe University of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations