This book explores the nature of COVID-19 through posing four questions: What could be said to be the cause of COVID-19? Who is likely to be infected? Where is infection likely to take place? When is infection likely to occur? It will demonstrate that these four W questions are interconnected, that they are the very ones which pre-occupy biomedicine today, whether in the form of clinical medicine or epidemiology. Epidemiology is often portrayed as “sub-standard”, while clinical medicine is put on a pedestal, marked as “superior” and “methodologically impeccable/privileged”. This book challenges this standard assessment. It argues that the causal model underpinning epidemiology is more adequate to account for medical data and evidence, across the board. Epidemiological Thinking is Medical Thinking, which this book calls Ecosystem Thinking and, through it, explores the values underpinning Medical Thinking, including geopolitical values.
This book makes Classical Chinese Medicine (CCM) intelligible to those who are not familiar with the tradition, many of whom may choose to dismiss it off-hand or to assess it negatively) . Keekok Lee uses two related strategies: arguing that all science and therefore medicine cannot be understood without excavating its philosophical presuppositions and showing what those presuppositions are in the case of CCM compared with those of biomedicine. Such excavations enable Lee in turn to demonstrate the following theses: (1) the metaphysical/ontological core of a medical system entails its own methodology, how to understand, diagnose and treat an illness/disease; (2) CCM rests on process-ontology, is Wholist, its general mode of thinking is Contextual-dyadic, its implicit logic is multi-valent, its model of causality is non-linear and multi-factorial; (3) Biomedicine (in the main) rests on thing-ontology and dualism, is Reductionist, its logic is classical bi-valent, its model of causality is linear and monofactorial; (4) hence to condemn CCM as “unscientific”/”pseudo-scientific”/plain “mumbo-jumbo” while privileging Biomedicine as the Gold Standard of scientificity is as absurd as to judge a cat to be inferior to a dog, using the criteria of “goodness” embodied in a dog-show.
An exploration of the philosophical foundation of modern medicine which explains why such a medicine possesses the characteristics it does and where precisely its strengths as well as its weaknesses lie. Written in plain English, it should be accessible to anyone who is intellectually curious, lay persons and medical professionals alike.
In this book, Keekok Lee asks the question, 'what is an animal, and how does our treatment of it within captivity affect its status as a being ?' This ontological treatment marks the first such approach in looking at animals in captivity. Engaging with the moral questions of zoo-keeping (is it morally justified to keep a wild animal in captivity?) as well as the ontological (what is it that we conserve in zoos after all? A wild animal or its shadow?), Lee develops her own original hypothesis, centred around the concept of 'immuration' - defining this in contrast to domestication - and thereby provides a unique addition to the growing body of work on animal ethics.
This volume completes a trilogy (Lee, 2012, 2017) on the philosophy of medicine, Western and Chinese. Its immediate prequel (Lee, 2017) sets out in general outline the philosophical and methodological core of Classical Chinese Medicine (CCM); this volume fleshes out that “skeleton” by examining in detail its peculiar concepts and characteristics, such as Getihua/Personalised Medicine, Preventive Medicine, Tianren-xiangying (Macro-Micro-cosmic Wholism), Zhèng-Fang Wholism (Wholism at the level of diagnosis and treatment), and Mind-Body Wholism (the person as primitive concept). CCM is here shown to instantiate “ecosystem science”, which is post-Newtonian in orientation, departing from familiar Newtonian landmarks such as Reductionism and linearity, resting on thing-ontology for a non-reductionist, non-linear science. This approach highlights a rich irony and paradox: namely, how CCM in being backward-looking (relying on classical texts as foundational texts and prescriptions of some two thousand years standing) simultaneously manages to be at the cutting edge of scientific thinking today.
This book makes Classical Chinese Medicine (CCM) intelligible to those who are not familiar with the tradition, many of whom may choose to dismiss it off-hand or to assess it negatively) . Keekok Lee uses two related strategies: arguing that all science and therefore medicine cannot be understood without excavating its philosophical presuppositions and showing what those presuppositions are in the case of CCM compared with those of biomedicine. Such excavations enable Lee in turn to demonstrate the following theses: (1) the metaphysical/ontological core of a medical system entails its own methodology, how to understand, diagnose and treat an illness/disease; (2) CCM rests on process-ontology, is Wholist, its general mode of thinking is Contextual-dyadic, its implicit logic is multi-valent, its model of causality is non-linear and multi-factorial; (3) Biomedicine (in the main) rests on thing-ontology and dualism, is Reductionist, its logic is classical bi-valent, its model of causality is linear and monofactorial; (4) hence to condemn CCM as “unscientific”/”pseudo-scientific”/plain “mumbo-jumbo” while privileging Biomedicine as the Gold Standard of scientificity is as absurd as to judge a cat to be inferior to a dog, using the criteria of “goodness” embodied in a dog-show.
This volume completes a trilogy (Lee, 2012, 2017) on the philosophy of medicine, Western and Chinese. Its immediate prequel (Lee, 2017) sets out in general outline the philosophical and methodological core of Classical Chinese Medicine (CCM); this volume fleshes out that “skeleton” by examining in detail its peculiar concepts and characteristics, such as Getihua/Personalised Medicine, Preventive Medicine, Tianren-xiangying (Macro-Micro-cosmic Wholism), Zhèng-Fang Wholism (Wholism at the level of diagnosis and treatment), and Mind-Body Wholism (the person as primitive concept). CCM is here shown to instantiate “ecosystem science”, which is post-Newtonian in orientation, departing from familiar Newtonian landmarks such as Reductionism and linearity, resting on thing-ontology for a non-reductionist, non-linear science. This approach highlights a rich irony and paradox: namely, how CCM in being backward-looking (relying on classical texts as foundational texts and prescriptions of some two thousand years standing) simultaneously manages to be at the cutting edge of scientific thinking today.
This book explores the nature of COVID-19 through posing four questions: What could be said to be the cause of COVID-19? Who is likely to be infected? Where is infection likely to take place? When is infection likely to occur? It will demonstrate that these four W questions are interconnected, that they are the very ones which pre-occupy biomedicine today, whether in the form of clinical medicine or epidemiology. Epidemiology is often portrayed as “sub-standard”, while clinical medicine is put on a pedestal, marked as “superior” and “methodologically impeccable/privileged”. This book challenges this standard assessment. It argues that the causal model underpinning epidemiology is more adequate to account for medical data and evidence, across the board. Epidemiological Thinking is Medical Thinking, which this book calls Ecosystem Thinking and, through it, explores the values underpinning Medical Thinking, including geopolitical values.
Originally published in 1985, this book establishes that moral discourse is critical, rational and objective and challenges the ideology of value irrationalism behind contemporary liberalism. The book discusses the origins of the fact/value distinction, and calls into question the thesis that logical derivability or strict implication is the only legitimate relationship between propositions. A straightforward philosophical treatment of the subject, in the analytical tradition, it will be especially useful for undergraduate students.
This book attempts to deconstruct certain key clusters of Chinese characters and words to make them yield fascinating tales about the country's culture and history.
The last century saw two great revolutions in genetics; the development of classic Mendelian theory and the discovery and investigation of DNA. Each fundamental scientific discovery in turn generated its own distinctive technology. Biotechnology is the offspring of the latter and is expected to be the driving force behind economic growth in the twenty-first century. These two case studies enable the author to conduct a philosophical exploration of the relationship between fundamental scientific discoveries on the one hand, and the technologies that spring from them on the other. As such it is also an exercise in the philosophy of technology.
Originally published in 1989 Social Philosophy and Ecological Scarcity presents a systematic study of the implications of ecological scarcity for social philosophy. The book argues for a new social philosophy based on a conception of the ‘good society’ and the ‘good life’ which makes fewer, rather than more demands on scarce ecological resources. The book shows that the two major competing social philosophies in modern philosophical thought – the bourgeois liberal and the state socialist – are both forms of capitalism. Despite their obvious differences, they both pursue the logic of capitalism, of ever-increasing accumulation, growth and consumption. This pursuit is carried out by means of modern science and its technology, which assume that Nature’s resources are inexhaustible and can be exploited to meet infinite human wants or needs, ignoring ecological scarcity. The recognition of ecological scarcity would lead to a social philosophy, based on a frugal mode of socialism which has more affinities with the social visions of Fourier and Morris than with that of Marx. Their theories, far from being too ‘utopian’, are shown as more ‘realistic’ and less ‘fantastic’ than either bourgeois capitalism or state capitalism based on the Marxist model.
The last century saw two great revolutions in genetics; the development of classic Mendelian theory and the discovery and investigation of DNA. Each fundamental scientific discovery in turn generated its own distinctive technology. Biotechnology is the offspring of the latter and is expected to be the driving force behind economic growth in the twenty-first century. These two case studies enable the author to conduct a philosophical exploration of the relationship between fundamental scientific discoveries on the one hand, and the technologies that spring from them on the other. As such it is also an exercise in the philosophy of technology.
Independent philosopher Lee (recently of the U. of Manchester) attends to the deeper implications of ecologically insensitive technology beyond its polluting effects. Contrasting modern with premodern worldviews provides the context for exploring how new sciences like biotechnology require an expanded environmental ethos encompassing both the biotic and the abiotic. The author considers misconceived the notions of nature as either a work of art or a mere social construct per some postmodern thinking. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR
Independent philosopher Lee (recently of the U. of Manchester) attends to the deeper implications of ecologically insensitive technology beyond its polluting effects. Contrasting modern with premodern worldviews provides the context for exploring how new sciences like biotechnology require an expanded environmental ethos encompassing both the biotic and the abiotic. The author considers misconceived the notions of nature as either a work of art or a mere social construct per some postmodern thinking. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR
Originally published in 1989 Social Philosophy and Ecological Scarcity presents a systematic study of the implications of ecological scarcity for social philosophy. The book argues for a new social philosophy based on a conception of the ‘good society’ and the ‘good life’ which makes fewer, rather than more demands on scarce ecological resources. The book shows that the two major competing social philosophies in modern philosophical thought – the bourgeois liberal and the state socialist – are both forms of capitalism. Despite their obvious differences, they both pursue the logic of capitalism, of ever-increasing accumulation, growth and consumption. This pursuit is carried out by means of modern science and its technology, which assume that Nature’s resources are inexhaustible and can be exploited to meet infinite human wants or needs, ignoring ecological scarcity. The recognition of ecological scarcity would lead to a social philosophy, based on a frugal mode of socialism which has more affinities with the social visions of Fourier and Morris than with that of Marx. Their theories, far from being too ‘utopian’, are shown as more ‘realistic’ and less ‘fantastic’ than either bourgeois capitalism or state capitalism based on the Marxist model.
This book attempts to deconstruct certain key clusters of Chinese characters and words to make them yield fascinating tales about the country's culture and history.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.