Boorse's biostatistical theory and Nordenfelt's action-theoretic account show that competing ontologies of disease track competing normative commitments, not discoverable natural facts.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
Nordenfelt(as a key philosopher in philosophy of medicine)
Lennart Nordenfelt, a philosopher who argued against Boorse's theory by showing that defining health and disease actually does require making value judgments, not just looking at biology.
Ontologies(when incompatible, they create problems)
Sets of assumptions about what kinds of things actually exist and how they're fundamentally different from each other (for example, whether something is a physical object, a thought, an energy, etc.).
normative commitments(as used in philosophy of science)
When a theory takes a stance on how things *should* be or what *ought* to happen, rather than just describing how things actually are.