On illness, disease, and priority: a framework for more fruitful debates

AbstractThe distinction between ‘disease’ and ‘illness’ has played an important role in the debate betweennaturalism andnormativism. Both employ these notions, yet disagree on whether to assign priority to ‘disease’ or ‘illness’. I argue that this discussion suffers from implicit differences in the underlying interpretations: While for naturalists the distinction between ‘disease’ and ‘illness’ is one between a descriptive and a prescriptive notion, for normativists it is one between c ause and effect. This discrepancy is connected to different interpretations of priority, which also tend to be conflated in the debate. I disambiguate these different usages and develop a distinction between ‘disease’ and ‘illness’ that is theoretically neutral with regard to naturalism or n ormativism. Moreover, I propose a concept ofheuristic priority that could serve as a common focus. This framework can avoid common confusions by providing a shared terminology and thereby help to make debates on disease-concepts more fruitful.
Source: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy - Category: Medical Ethics Source Type: research