Abstract
AbstractDisability studies have been successfully focusing on individuals' lived experiences, the personalization of goals, and the constitution of the individual in defining disease and restructuring public understandings of disability. Although they had a strong influence in the policy making and medical modeling of disease, their framework has not been translated to traditional naturalistic accounts of disease. I will argue that, using new developments in evolutionary biology (Extended Evolutionary Synthesis [EES] about questions of proper function) and behavioral ecology (Niche conformance and construction about the questions of reference classes in biostatistics accounts), the main elements of the framework of disability studies can be used to represent life histories at the conceptual level of the two main “non-normative” accounts of disease. I chose these accounts since they are related to medicine in a more descriptive way. The success of the practical aspects of disability studies this way will be communicated without causing injustice to the individual since they will represent the individuality of the patient in two main naturalistic accounts of disease: the biostatistical account and the evolutionary functional account. Although most accounts criticizing the concept of disease as value-laden do not supply a positive element, disability studies can supply a good point for descriptive extension of the concept through inclusion of epistemic agency.
Funder
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference91 articles.
1. Altinok, O. 2022. Darwinize it two times: On the possibilities of extending evolutionary medicine through new developments in evolutionary theory. Azimuth 19 (1): 197–210.
2. Altinok, O. 2023. Evolution and evolutionary medicine in disease. In Conceptual and ethical challenges of evolutionary medicine ethics of science and technology assessment, vol. 53. Cham: Springer.
3. Amundson, R. 1992. Disability, handicap, and the environment. Journal of Social Philosophy 23 (1): 105–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.1992.tb00489.x.
4. Anderson, W. 2006. Colonial pathologies. Durham: Duke University Press.
5. Badyaev, A.V., and T. Uller. 2009. Parental effects in ecology and evolution: Mechanisms, processes and implications. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 364 (1520): 1169–1177.