Advertisement

Definition

  • Barbara MaierEmail author
  • Warren A. Shibles†
Chapter
Part of the International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine book series (LIME, volume 47)

Abstract

In the philosophy of medicine, as with philosophy in general, we may assume that words are meaningless and statements false until defined and defended. With an uncritical language we do not know what we are talking about. We typically fail to understand how definition works. Because there are many types of definition we often knowingly or unknowingly argue a case by equivocating between different definitions or by giving a false, biased, or persuasive definition. We cannot have absolutely true or literal definitions for anything. Definitions may be rather regarded as perspectival seeings-as. To define non-circularly is to relate different things. To define is to take a model or metaphor. Distinction is made between several types of definition. To define and critically examine given definitions will be a main task throughout this book.

Keywords

Definition types of definition misuse of language circular statement equivocation universe of discourse word field literal definition metaphorical definition use in context definition 

References

  1. 1.
    Schiller, F.C.S. 1930. Logic for use. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wittgenstein, L. 1958. Philosophical investigations, 3rd edn. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    DSM-III-R, DSM-IV-R, ICD-10. 10th revised edition. 3 vols. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    International Classification of Diseases. 2000. AMA. 9th Revised edition.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elshtain, J. 1981. Public men, private women. University Press: Princeton.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murphy, E. 1997. The logic of medicine, 2nd edn. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sharpe, E. 1940. Psychophysical problems revealed in language: An examination of metaphor. International Journal of Psychoanalysis 21:201–213.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Martin, K., and Scheet, N. 1992. The omaha system: A pocket guide for community health nursing. PA: Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shibles, W. 2002. Humor reference guide: A comprehensive classification and analysis. eBook on humor at http://facstaff.uww.edu/shiblesw/ or search: Shibles, Humor.
  11. 11.
    Suppes, P., and Edwards, P. 1967. Encyclopedia of philosophy, vol 2, 310. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beardsley, M. 1958. Aesthetics. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bridgeman, P. W. 1927. The logic of physics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    WHO Basic documents. 43rd edn Geneva, World Health Organization. 2001a, p.1. See also Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19–22 June, 1946. URL: http://www.who.int/about/definition/en/ (accessed 2004 July 5).
  15. 15.
    O’Donnell M. P. 2009. Definition of health promotion 2.0: Embracing passion, enhancing motivation, recognizing dynamic balance, and creating opportunity. American Journal of Health promotion 24:4Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oh, H., Rizo, C., Enkin, M., and Jadad, A. 2005. What is health: A systematic review of published definitions. Journal of Medical Internet Research 7:58–60. jmir.org/2005/1/e1/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Gynecology and ObstetricsParacelsus Medical University SALKSalzburgAustria
  2. 2.University of Wisconsin–WhitewaterWhitewaterUSA

Personalised recommendations