Running head: Objectivist versus constructivist Objectivist versus Constructivist in Health and Illness (name) (date) Objectivist versus Constructivist Introduction The delivery of healthcare services is considered one of the most essential social services of any country and government institution…
Download file to see previous pages...
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 concerned with the “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 different 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
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
(“Healthcare Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/philosophy/1423028-healthcare
(Healthcare Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 Words)
“Healthcare Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/philosophy/1423028-healthcare.
Both of these organizations have the same objectives and that they are both private organizations. The differences can be found in the standards and requirements needed in order to pass their accreditation. NCQA’s approach to credentialing is characterized by comprehensive and detailed process that includes all of the MCO’s operations.
The constructed standardized procedures created by governing states, including constitutional concept of “due process and equal protection,” extend mostly to government hospitals--limited in private hospitals (Showalter, 2003). On the former principle, appropriate means are employed during professional screening, where it prohibits hospitals from acting in discriminatory way, and appeals for equitable and reasonable application of public regulations.
One of these bills is the Healthcare Bill 1003 that was created by the Mississippi state in 2012 (Wolf, 2001). In analyzing this legislative bill and its impact to the economy of the country, this essay seeks to evaluate the equity of resources allocation as it explains why the bill should be passed in the modern times.
A candidate or incumbent's healthcare program and proposals for healthcare reform are, to say the least, critical electoral issues. However, while both candidates and incumbents often propose reforms which figure as promising solutions to the problems affecting the system, they are hardly, if ever implemented.
During this period slave health deficit emerged and gave rise to the racist healthcare delivery system. In 1946, the federal government was been accused of instigating and aiding racial discrimination in hospitals by
r relationship is a current ethical healthcare issue that requires medical practitioners to overcome so as to meet the society healthcare needs and save lives (Wazana, 2000). It has led to conflict of interest; between pleasing pharmaceutical companies offering inducements and
ill, it is the contention of this paper that reducing healthcare cost, especially in the case of Utah, is not the best way to improve access to healthcare. This paper discusses the cause and effect of rising healthcare cost in Utah and then presents an argumentative discussion
ure for which President Obama will be fondly remembered for, it has also been the cause of many headaches for healthcare administrators and owners of hospitals. This is primarily because it sees a significant reduction in profits for the once lucrative healthcare