Philosophy of Medicine and Covid-19

Must Do Better

Authors

  • Alex Broadbent Department of Philosophy, Durham University, Durham, UK; Department of Philosophy, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5120-6584

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/pom.2022.143

Keywords:

Covid 19, philosophy of medicine, philosophy of epidemiology

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic was a world event on our intellectual doorstep. What were our duties to respond, and how well did we respond? We published papers, but we did not engage extensively or influentially in public debate. Perhaps we felt we were not experts. Yet in a health crisis, philosophers of medicine can offer not only “conceptual clarification,” but also domain-specific knowledge concerning structural properties of relevant sciences and their social-political uses. I set out three conditions for the kind of contribution I felt was lacking: public, critical, and timely. And I call for us to do more of it.

References

Amoretti, Maria Cristina and Elisabetta Lalumera. 2022. “Reviewing the Reproduction Number R in Covid-19 Models.” Philosophy of Medicine 3, no. 1: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.5195/pom.2022.78.

Lichtenstein, Eli I. 2022. “Inconvenient Truth and Inductive Risk in Covid-19 Science.” Philosophy of Medicine 3, no. 1: 1–25. https://doi.org/10.5195/pom.2022.132.

Williamson, Timothy. 2007. “Afterword: Must Do Better.” In The Philosophy of Philosophy, 278–92. Wiley Online Books. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470696675.after.

Downloads

Published

2022-12-15

How to Cite

Broadbent, A. (2022). Philosophy of Medicine and Covid-19: Must Do Better. Philosophy of Medicine, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.5195/pom.2022.143

Issue

Section

Perspectives