Advertisement

A Conflict of Interpretations in Gerontology

  • Hans-Jörg EhniEmail author
Chapter
Part of the International Perspectives on Aging book series (Int. Perspect. Aging, volume 10)

Abstract

Gerontology is an interdisciplinary field. Corresponding to the many facets of the main object of its study, many different scientific methods and theories are part of a common inquiry into the understanding of old age and aging processes. The social sciences or social gerontology and biology or biogerontology provide important contributions to these inquiries. Both fields develop their own theoretical frameworks, which determine their basic understanding of aging and old age. However, both social gerontology and biogerontology also have set practical goals for their respective research agenda. These goals are not only guiding the direction of the scientific work, but they also inform and guide the different interpretations of aging and old age. This chapter will outline how these different practical goals lead to a conflict of interpretations of aging, which creates a general conflict between social-gerontological and biogerontological research agendas and on what is considered an appropriate understanding of aging and old age. One consequence is that synergies and cooperation between the different fields of gerontology are hindered. An interdisciplinary dialogue to raise the awareness of the different interpretations of age and aging is suggested as a possible way out from this unfortunate situation, towards a more integrated interpretation of age and aging, and possibly towards a common research agenda.

Keywords

Aging Process Research Agenda Social Construction Physical Aging Ethical Evaluation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This book chapter is one of the results of the work I was able to carry out during my FLARE postdoctoral fellowship from 2008 to 2011. Without this fellowship and the resulting opportunities for scientific networking and exchange, an interdisciplinary research question like the one I am discussing here would be very hard, if not impossible, to answer. I want to thank the German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF), which provided funding for this project as partner in ERA-AGE for this opportunity. The same thanks go to of course to the people from ERA-AGE and the coordinating partner in Sheffield, who have been incredibly supportive for my work. For providing peer review for this chapter, I want to thank Wim Pinxten and Anja Leist for her thorough reading and comments, which were very helpful for improving and clarifying this chapter and its content.

References

  1. Alley DE, Putney NM, Rice M, Bengtson VL (2010) The increasing use of theory in social gerontology: 1990-2004. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 65(5):583–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arking R (2006) The biology of aging: observations and principles. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Austad SN (2002) Session 1: adding years to life: current knowledge and future prospects. http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/pcbe/transcripts/dec02/session1.html. Accessed 27 Sept 2013
  4. Bengtson VL, Burgess EO, Parrott TM (1997) Theory, explanation, and a third generation of theoretical development in social gerontology. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 52(2):S72–S88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blumenthal HT (2003) The aging-disease dichotomy: true or false? J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 58A(2):138–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Butler RN (1968) Age-ism. Gerontologist 9(4):243–246Google Scholar
  7. Butler RN (2008) The longevity revolution. Public Affairs, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Butler RN, Miller RA, Perry D, Carnes BA, Williams TF, Cassel C, Brody J, Bernard MA, Partridge L, Kirkwood T, Martin GM, Olshansky SJ (2008) New model of health promotion and disease prevention for the 21st century. Br Med J 337(7662):a399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dannefer D, Settersten RA (2010) The study of the life course: implications for social gerontology. The SAGE handbook of social gerontology. Sage, London, pp 3–19Google Scholar
  10. Ehni H (2012) Evil, problem of. In: Chadwick R (ed) Encyclopedia of applied ethics. Academic, San Diego, pp 226–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehni H (2014) Ethik der Biogerontologie [Ethics of biogerontology]. Springer VS, WiesbadenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Epel ES, Blackburn EH, Lin J, Dhabhar FS, Adler NE, Morrow JD, Cawthon RM (2004) Accelerated telomere shortening in response to life stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101(49): 17312–17315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Estes CL (2001) Social policy and aging. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  14. Farrelly C (2008) A tale of two strategies. The moral imperative to tackle ageing. EMBO Rep 9(7):592–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fontana L (2009) Modulating human aging and age-associated diseases. Biochim Biophys Acta 1790(10):1133–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gems D (2003) Is more life always better? Hastings Cent Rep 33(4):31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gems D (2011) Tragedy and delight: the ethics of decelerated ageing. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 366(1561):108–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Habermas J (1968) Erkenntnis und Interesse [Knowledge and interests]. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainGoogle Scholar
  19. Habermas J (1971) Knowledge and human interests. Beacon, BostonGoogle Scholar
  20. Hayflick L (2004) The not-so-close relationship between biological aging and age-associated pathologies in humans. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 59(6):B547–B550, discussion 551–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kirkwood T (2005) Understanding the odd science of aging. Cell 120(4):437–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kirkwood T (2011) Systems biology of ageing and longevity. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 366(1561):64–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kuh D (2006) A life course perspective on telomere length and social inequalities in aging. Aging Cell 5(6):579–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McDaniel SA, Zimmer Z (2013) Global ageing in the twenty-first century. Ashgate, SurreyGoogle Scholar
  25. Moody HR (2001) Who’s afraid of life extension. Generations 25(4):33–37Google Scholar
  26. Nussbaum MC (1992) Human functioning and social justice: in defense of aristotelian essentialism. Polit Theor 20(2):202–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Olshansky SJ, Perry D, Miller RA, Butler RN (2006) In pursuit of the longevity dividend. Scientist 20(3):28–36Google Scholar
  28. Palmore EB, Branch L, Harris DK (2005) Encyclopedia of ageism. Haworth Pastoral Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Rattan SIS (2007) The science of healthy aging: genes, milieu, and chance. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1114:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ricœur P (1969) Le Conflit des interprétations [The conflict of interpretations]. Éditions du Seuil, ParisGoogle Scholar
  31. Ricœur P (1974) The conflict of interpretations. Northwestern University Press, EvanstonGoogle Scholar
  32. Rose MR (2009) Adaptation, aging, and genomic information. Aging 1(5):444–450Google Scholar
  33. Sachverständigenkommission zur Erstellung des Sechsten Altenberichts der Bundesregierung [Commission for the Sixth German Government Report on the Elderly] (2010) Sechster Bericht zur Lage der älteren Generation in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Sixth German Government Report on the Elderly]. Deutscher Bundestag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  34. Searle JR (2010) Making the social world. Oxford University Press, Oxford [u.a.]Google Scholar
  35. Snow CP (1959) The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Stoljar D (2009) Physicalism. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/physicalism/. Accessed 11 Nov 2013
  37. Vincent JA (2003) What is at stake in the “war on anti-ageing medicine”? Ageing Soc 23(5): 675–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vincent JA (2008) The cultural construction old age as a biological phenomenon: science and anti-ageing technologies. J Aging Stud 331–339Google Scholar
  39. Vincent JA (2009) Ageing, anti-ageing, and anti-anti-ageing: who are the progressives in the debate on the future of human biological ageing? Med Stud 1(3):197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zuidervaart L (2011) Theodor W. Adorno. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/adorno/. Accessed 11 Nov 2013

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für Ethik und Geschichte der MedizinUniversity of TübingenTübingenGermany

Personalised recommendations