INTRODUCTION: TWO THEORIES OF HEALTH

A central problem in the philosophy of health is to adequately characterize the notions of health and disease and at the same time to establish the nature of the relation between these notions. Are the two notions completely tied to each other, so that health is the total absence of disease, or is there a much looser connection? Is health something over and above the absence of disease? Is health even compatible with the existence of disease?

We seem to have varying intuitions in this regard. We seem also inclined to interpret health slightly differently in different contexts. I have discussed these issues in earlier publications (Nordenfelt 1987/1995, 2000, 2001, 2007). In this chapter I wish to continue this discussion by raising some crucial points that have recently come to the fore. I will advance and scrutinize certain arguments for and against some central current theories in the philosophy of health. In order to do this I have to present these theories as clearly and concisely as I can.

I will present two theories of health: a biostatistical theory of health (BST) and a holistic theory of health (HTH). The clearest version of the BST has been proposed by the American philosopher Christopher Boorse, first in 1977 and later in a more developed presentation in 1997. The HTH has appeared in several versions, presented by authors such as Caroline Whitbeck (1981), Ingmar Pörn (1993), K. W. M Fulford (1989) and myself (1987/1995).