Department of Philosophy, Hamburg University, Von-Melle-Park 6, 20146, Hamburg, Germany.
Theor Med Bioeth. 2010 Feb;31(1):35-47. doi: 10.1007/s11017-010-9136-y.
The concept of mental disorder is often defined by reference to the notion of mental dysfunction, which is in line with how the concept of disease in somatic medicine is often defined. However, the notions of mental function and dysfunction seem to suffer from some problems that do not affect models of physiological function. Functions in general have a teleological structure; they are effects of traits that are supposed to have a particular purpose, such that, for example, the heart serves the goal of pumping blood. But can we single out mental functions in the same way? Can we identify mental functions scientifically, for instance, by applying evolutionary theory? Or are models of mental functions necessarily value-laden? I want to identify several philosophical problems regarding the notion of mental function and dysfunction and point out some possible solutions. As long as these questions remain unanswered, definitions of mental disorder that rest upon the concept of mental dysfunction will lack a secure foundation.
心理障碍的概念通常是通过参照心理功能障碍的概念来定义的,这与躯体医学中疾病概念的定义方式是一致的。然而,心理功能和障碍的概念似乎存在一些问题,这些问题并不会影响到生理功能的模型。一般来说,功能具有目的论结构;它们是假定具有特定目的的特征的效果,例如,心脏的作用是泵血。但是,我们能否以同样的方式单独确定心理功能呢?例如,我们能否通过应用进化理论从科学上识别心理功能?或者心理功能模型是否必然带有价值倾向?我想确定与心理功能和障碍概念有关的几个哲学问题,并指出一些可能的解决方案。只要这些问题没有得到回答,基于心理功能障碍概念的心理障碍定义就缺乏可靠的基础。