Paracetamol, Poison, and Polio: Why Boorse's Account of Function Fails to Distinguish Health and Disease

Abstract

Christopher Boorse's Bio Statistical Theory (BST) defines health as the absence of disease, and disease as the adverse departure from normal species functioning. This paper presents a two-pronged problem for this account. First I demonstrate that, in order to accurately account for dynamic physiological functions, Boorse's account of normal function needs to be modified to index functions against situations. I then demonstrate that if functions are indexed against situations, the BST can no longer account for diseases that result from specific environmental factors. The BST is impaled on either horn of this dilemma and therefore must be dismissed. 1. A More Sophisticated Version of the BST 1.1. Normal function1.2. Health as a quantitative normal function1.3. Dispositional function1.4. Situation-specific function1.5. Summary and justification2. An Inescapable Problem 2.1. Harmful environments and situation-specific diseases2.2. A detailed example2.3. Two possible replies refuted2.4. Conclusion of Section 23. Potential Ways out of the Dilemma 3.1. Distinguishing between harmful and normal situations3.2. First solution: Statistically abnormal environments 3.2.1. Rare non-harmful environments3.2.2. Harmful non-rare environments3.3. Second solution: Adverse environments3.4. Third solution: Non-natural environments3.5. Interim conclusion and diagnosis3.6. Abusing the function concept?4. The BST Refuted 4.1. A central tension4.2. Differences with previous arguments4.3. Conclusion