Our conceptions of suffering and of pain are vitiated by dualistic ways of thinking. For example, Eric Cassell’s definition of suffering implies that it is a psychological accompaniment to pain. This article challenges this approach by positing an Aristotelian conception of the human person and defining suffering as the frustration of the internal tendencies of all aspects of the person. In this way suffering can be seen as an objective condition irrespective of the mental states of the victim. Further, on this conception, suffering can be attributed to animals and other organisms.
Callahan, D. et al. (1996). The goals of medicine: Setting new priorities. Hastings Center Report. November–December, special supplement.
2.
Cassell, E.J. (1991). The nature of suffering. New York: Oxford University Press.
3.
Cassell, E.J. (1992). The nature of suffering: Physical, psychological, social, and spiritual aspects. In P.L. Starck and J.P. McGovern (Eds.), The hidden dimension of illness: Human suffering, pp. 1–10. New York: National League for Nursing Press.
4.
James, W. (1950[1918]). The principles of psychology (authorized edn, unabridged). New York: Dover Publications.
5.
Levin, D.M. and Solomon, G.F. (1990). The discursive formation of the body in the history of medicine. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 15(5), 515–537.
6.
Nietzsche, F. (1973). Beyond good and evil: Prelude to a philosophy of the future, trans. R.J. Hollingdale. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
7.
Pellegrino, E.D. and Thomasma, D.C. (1981). A philosophical basis of medical practice: Toward a philosophy and ethics of the healing professions. New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
Reznek, L. (1987). The nature of disease. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
9.
Scheler, M. (1954). On the nature of sympathy, trans. P. Heath. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
10.
van Hooft, S. (1995). Caring: An essay in the philosophy of ethics. Niwot, CO: University Press of Colorado.
11.
van Hooft, S. (1997). Health and subjectivity. Health, (1)1, 23–36.
