Skip to main content
Log in

On the Supposed Utility of a Folk Theory of Pain

  • Published:
Brain and Mind

Abstract

What follows raises objections to some arguments that claimthat a “principle of applicability” of ordinary pain talkconstrains developments in the pain sciences. A more apt pictureof lay use of pain language shows its non-theoretic character.Since instrumentalism and eliminativism are philosophical viewsabout the status of theories of pain, neither is a threatto clinical use of standard pain lingo. Perfected pain theoryis likely to enhance and improve pain language in clinicalsettings, should such theory find its way into popular ideasand talk of pain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Gustafson, D., 1998: Pain, qualia, and the explanatory gap, Philosophical Psychology 11(3), 371–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rey, R., 1994: The History of Pain, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gustafson, D. On the Supposed Utility of a Folk Theory of Pain. Brain and Mind 1, 223–228 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010083332119

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010083332119

Navigation