Cooper, R. V. (2002) Disease. Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences, 33 (2). pp. 263-282. ISSN 1369-8486Full text not available from this repository.
This paper examines what it is for a condition to be a disease. It falls into two sections. In the first I examine the best existing account of disease (as proposed by Christopher Boorse) and argue that it must be rejected. In the second I outline a more acceptable account of disease. According to this account, by disease we mean a condition that it is a bad thing to have, that is such that we consider the afflicted person to have been unlucky, and that can potentially be medically treated. All three criteria must be fulfilled for a condition to be a disease. The criterion that for a condition to be a disease it must be a bad thing is required to distinguish the biologically different from the diseased. The claim that the sufferer must be unlucky is needed to distinguish diseases from conditions that are unpleasant but normal, for example teething. Finally, the claim that for a condition to be a disease it must be potentially medically treatable is needed to distinguish diseases from other types of misfortune, for example economic problems and legal problems.
|Journal or Publication Title:||Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences|
|Additional Information:||RAE_import_type : Journal article RAE_uoa_type : Philosophy|
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||Disease ; Disorder ; Health ; Christopher Boorse|
|Subjects:||B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General)|
|Departments:||Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences > Politics & International Relations (Merged into PPR 2010-08-01)|
|Deposited On:||04 Mar 2008 13:25|
|Last Modified:||26 Jul 2012 18:04|
Actions (login required)