The naturalization of the concept of disease

Mael Lemoine (1, 2)

1 iBraiN - Imaging, Brain & Neuropsychiatry
2 IHPST - Institut d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques

Science starts by using terms such as ‘temperature’ or ‘fish’ or ‘gene’ to preliminarily delimitate the extension of a phenomenon, and concludes by giving most of them a technical meaning based on an explanatory model. This transforma- tion of the meaning of the term is an essential part of its naturalization. Debating on the definition of ‘disease’, what most philosophers of medicine have examined is the pre-naturalized meaning of the term: for that reason they have focused on the task of delimiting disease and non-disease (health), mainly used conceptual analysis as a method of choice, and considered the nosological level of ‘disease judgments’ rather than the pathophysiological or psychopathological level of disease mechanisms, thus making them impervious to most scientific discoveries. By focusing instead on the naturalized concept of disease and following some suggestions by philosophers of biology and scientists in cutting-edge fields of biomedical research, they could gar- ner results from a comparison of the mechanisms of diseases. This would ultimately result in a general theory of disease linked with our most general theories on living beings, among them, systems biology and network medicine. Before undertaking such a task, preliminary questions arise: is it likely that there are biological features common to different types of disease? Is it a philosopher’s job to determine what they consist in? What use would such a general theoretical definition of disease be?

Mots clés: disease; model; conceptual analysis; naturalization

Domaines: Histoire, Philosophie et Sociologie des sciences

Mael Lemoine. The naturalization of the concept of disease. Classification, Disease and Evidence. New Essays in the Philosophy of Medicine, Springer, 2014, 978-94-017-8886-1. ⟨10.1007/978-94-017-8887-8_2⟩. ⟨hal-01098106⟩