Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 5 (1):1-5 (2010)
|Abstract||Basing ourselves on the writings of Hans Jonas, we offer to psychosomatic medicine a philosophy of life that surmounts the mind-body dualism which has plagued Western thought since the origins of modern science in seventeenth century Europe. Any present-day account of reality must draw upon everything we know about the living and the non-living. Since we are living beings ourselves, we know what it means to be alive from our own first-hand experience. Therefore, our philosophy of life, in addition to starting with what empirical science tells us about inorganic and organic reality, must also begin from our own direct experience of life in ourselves and in others; it can then show how the two meet in the living being. Since life is ultimately one reality, our theory must reintegrate psyche with soma such that no component of the whole is short-changed, neither the objective nor the subjective. In this essay, we lay out the foundational components of such a theory by clarifying the defining features of living beings as polarities . We describe three such polarities: 1) Being vs. non-being: Always threatened by non-being, the organism must constantly re-assert its being through its own activity. 2) World-relatedness vs. self-enclosure: Living beings are both enclosed with themselves, defined by the boundaries that separate them from their environment, while they are also ceaselessly reaching out to their environment and engaging in transactions with it. 3) Dependence vs. independence: Living beings are both dependent on the material components that constitute them at any given moment and independent of any particular groupings of these components over time. We then discuss important features of the polarities of life: Metabolism; organic structure; enclosure by a semi-permeable membrane; distinction between "self" and "other"; autonomy; neediness; teleology; sensitivity; values. Moral needs and values already arise at the most basic levels of life, even if only human beings can recognize such values as moral requirements and develop responses to them|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Renaud Barbaras (2008). Life, Movement, and Desire. Research in Phenomenology 38 (1):3-17.
Boris Hennig (2007). Der Fortbestand Von Lebewesen. Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Philosophie 32 (1):81-91.
Fred Ablondi (1998). Automata, Living and Non-Living: Descartes' Mechanical Biology and His Criteria for Life. Biology and Philosophy 13 (2).
David Morris (2005). What is Living and What is Non-Living in Merleau-Ponty's Philosophy of Movement and Expression. Chiasmi International 7:225-238.
Brooke Alan Trisel (2007). Judging Life and Its Value. Sorites (18):60-75.
Thaddeus Metz (forthcoming). Life Worth Living. In Alex Michalos (ed.), Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-being Research. Springer.
Bernard Korzeniewski (2005). Confrontation of the Cybernetic Definition of a Living Individual with the Real World. Acta Biotheoretica 53 (1).
Ellen Frankel Paul, Fred Dycus Miller & Jeffrey Paul (eds.) (1992). The Good Life and the Human Good. Cambridge University Press.
Dr Fainos Mangena, Beings of a Life-Span Are Equal: Rebutting Singer's Sentience and Naess' Deep Ecology Criteria for Moral Standing.
James Kreines (2008). The Logic of Life: Hegel's Philosophical Defense of Teleological Explanation of Living Beings. In James Kreines (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Hegel and Nineteenth-Century Philosophy. Cambridge Univ Pr.
Ovidiu-Sorin Podar (2009). La Vie En Tant Que Vie. Studia Phaenomenologica 9:315-330.
Added to index2010-08-24
Total downloads16 ( #74,784 of 549,769 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 549,769 )
How can I increase my downloads?