Article Text
PDF
Abstract
In this short commentary, I reflect on the new definition of disease proposed by Powell and Scarffe. I suggest that the method they appeal to as objective, namely, rational justification, is open to several criticisms, which I outline and discuss.
- concept of health
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors I am the sole author and creator of the article. No one else was involved in any stage.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Correction notice This article has been amended since it was first published online. This article has been changed from a Response to a Commentary article.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Request Permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information:
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- ‘Rethinking “Disease”: a fresh diagnosis and a new philosophical treatment’
- Does the harm component of the harmful dysfunction analysis need rethinking?: Reply to Powell and Scarffe
- Response to commentaries on Powell/Scarffe feature article
- Disability and narrative: new directions for medicine and the medical humanities
- Chronic fatigue syndrome
- Abortion and regret
- Animal rights, animal minds, and human mindreading
- Debating disability
- Development of the chronic fatigue syndrome in severely fatigued employees: predictors of outcome in the Maastricht cohort study
- Behaviourally designed treatments that increase willingness to treatment from families with children suffering from autism spectrum disorder