What concept of disease should politicians use? Norman Daniels and the unjustifiable appeal of naturalistic analyses of health
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Norman Daniels argues that health is important for justice because it affects the distribution of opportunities. He claims that a just society should guarantee fair opportunities by promoting and restoring the “normal functioning” of its citizens, that is, their health. The scope of citizens' mutual obligations with respect to health is defined by a reasonable agreement that, according to Daniels, should be based on the distinction between normal functioning and pathology drawn by the biomedical sciences. This paper deals with the question whether it is legitimate to ascribe the responsibility of defining this important moral boundary to the biomedical sciences, which Daniels regards as value neutral. Daniels appeals to Christopher Boorse's sophisticated bio-statistical theory (BST) to show the plausibility of a value-neutral distinction between normal functioning and pathology. Here I argue that a careful analysis of the concept of normal functioning, such as the one offered by the recent critique by Elselijn Kingma, shows that it depends from evaluative assumptions. This, I argue, implies that Daniels's theory must give up its naturalistic commitments. In the conclusion, the paper offers a detailed discussion and an objection to one of Daniels's arguments in favor of a moderate form of normativism that remains too close to Boorse's naturalism.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Matt Lamkin (2011). Racist Appearance Standards and the Enhancements That Love Them: Norman Daniels and Skin-Lightening Cosmetics. Bioethics 25 (4):185-191.
Norman Daniels (2000). Normal Functioning and the Treatment-Enhancement Distinction. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 9 (3):309--322.
Shlomi Segall (2010). Is Health (Really) Special? Health Policy Between Rawlsian and Luck Egalitarian Justice. Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (4):344-358.
Elselijn Kingma (2010). Paracetamol, Poison, and Polio: Why Boorse's Account of Function Fails to Distinguish Health and Disease. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (2):241-264.
Norman Daniels (2001). Justice, Health, and Healthcare. American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):2 – 16.
B. Sachs (2010). Lingering Problems of Currency and Scope in Daniels's Argument for a Societal Obligation to Meet Health Needs. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (4):402-414.
Norman Daniels (2008). Just Health: Meeting Health Needs Fairly. Cambridge University Press.
Wilson James (2009). Not So Special After All? Daniels and the Social Determinants of Health. Journal of Medical Ethics 35:3 - 6..
Joseph Lacey (2012). Climate Change and Norman Daniels' Theory of Just Health: An Essay on Basic Needs. [REVIEW] Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (1):3-14.
Lawrence Stern (1983). Opportunity and Health Care: Criticisms and Suggestions. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 8 (4):339-361.
Added to index2009-03-20
Total downloads77 ( #54,518 of 1,796,192 )
Recent downloads (6 months)16 ( #44,620 of 1,796,192 )
How can I increase my downloads?