The article explores the complexities in defining health and disease, particularly through Doug's experience of feeling unwell despite normal test results. It highlights the philosophical distinctions between various perspectives such as Neutralism, Positive Health, Objectivism, Subjectivism, Naturalism, and Normativism. These frameworks influence how conditions like low libido and obesity are interpreted in medical contexts. The discussion also touches on the issue of epistemic injustice, where patients may feel their concerns are not taken seriously, ultimately impacting their healthcare experience and understanding of their health status.
The distinction between Neutralism and Positive Health emphasizes that mere absence of disease is insufficient for well-being, highlighting the broader definition encompassing mental and social wellness.
Navigating clinical encounters like Doug's presents high stakes due to the potential for epistemic injustice, where patients' experiences and concerns may be dismissed as unreliable or unworthy.
How we define health versus disease raises philosophical debates about whether conditions like low libido or being overweight should be classified as diseases or personal health issues.
The classification of diseases, such as alcoholism or obesity, invites a critical examination of the boundaries between normative considerations and objective medical criteria.
Collection
[
|
...
]