Diseases as natural kinds

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (5):347-369 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, I focus on life-threatening medical conditions and argue that from the point of view of natural properties, induction(s), and participation in laws, at least some of the ill organisms dealt with in somatic medicine form natural kinds in the same sense in which the kinds in the exact sciences are thought of as natural. By way of comparing two ‘divisions of nature’, viz., a ‘classical’ exact science kind (gold) and a kind of disease (Graves disease), I show that there is no justifiable ‘ontological gap’ between disease kinds and exact sciences kinds. We have instead a difference of degree

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 78,037

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Why Hacking is wrong about human kinds.Rachel Cooper - 2004 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (1):73-85.
Arthritis and Nature's Joints.Neil E. Williams - 2011 - In Michael O'Rourke, Joseph Keim Campbell & Matthew H. Slater (eds.), Carving Nature at its Joints: Natural Kinds in Metaphysics and Science. MIT Press.
Diseases and natural kinds.Daniel P. Sulmasy - 2005 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26 (6):487-513.
Is disease a natural kind?Robert D'Amico - 1995 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (5):551-569.
Dis-ease about kinds: Reply to D'Amico.Lawrie Reznek - 1995 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (5):571-584.
Do the Life Sciences Need Natural Kinds?Thomas A. Reydon - 2009 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 9 (2):167-190.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-06-30

Downloads
122 (#107,934)

6 months
4 (#202,449)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?