Healthcare Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Healthcare - Essay Example This paper shall now consider the debate regarding the objectivist and constructivist concepts of health and illness. It shall argue for the acceptance of one philosophical account over the other. It shall provide an analysis, comparison, and evaluation of both theories in relation to health and illness. This study is being carried out in the hope of establishing a thorough and comprehensive understanding of these theories in relation to health and illness. Discussion The current trends in philosophical thinking have focused on defining disease concepts as those which involve experiential assessments on human physiology and on human behavior and well-being (Bloomfield, 2001). First and foremost, people have beliefs about the normal functioning of their bodies based on their natural and logical expectations of physiology. Secondly, people make generalizations about how a way or condition of life is true or not. These generalizations are based on normative principles which are concerne d with the â€Å"extent to which a life is unnatural, undesirable or failing to flourish in some way† (Murphy, 2008). A crucial issue is on the judgments which people make about their physiology and whether they are also considered normative. A bigger question is on the impact of both judgments in the scientific field of medicine and in simple matters of common sense. A dilemma unearthed in understanding health and illness is the fact that our usual and traditional judgments determine who are considered ill or diseased. Such traditional views have not created as much impact on philosophy, but they have registered a significant impact in other areas, including humanities and social sciences (Kennedy, 1983). Some objectivists believe that there are details about the human physiology upon which the concept of diseases is founded. But constructivists point out that this is a major deception. Instead, these constructivists point out that the disputed cases indicate how the differe nt beliefs of social groups come into conflict with each other, and agreements are sometimes ensured because the system of values have been generally accepted (Murphy, 2008). Kitcher has been one of the first who has considered the objectivism and constructivism concepts in healthcare (Sarkar and Plutynski, 2010). These two theories have also been referred to as naturalism and normativism. Kitcher’s analysis is based on unclear facts about the human body. It is therefore crucial to create definite generalizations for objectivism and constructivism. First and foremost, the objectivist understanding of disease is that our human body is made up of different organs which have normal functions upon which they can depart in different ways (Murphy, 2008). These departures can either be harmless or sometimes harmful to humans. Those which are harmful manifest as diseases. A disease in this understanding is therefore based on normal functioning of the body and a general judgment of a result being something ‘abnormal’ or a departure from the natural. Objectivists believe that establishing the presence of a disease is a matter for science and that normative evaluations are the foundations of such judgment (Boorse, 1997). In effect, the objectivists believe that disease is a physiological malfunction which causes a life to deteriorate. Such a malfunction can manifest in different ways. Diseases may not be of the natural kind, but they