Values-Based Practice

Author(s):  
K.W.M. Fulford ◽  
C.W. van Staden ◽  
Roger Crisp

This chapter outlines the origins in ordinary language philosophy of a new skills-based approach to working with complex and conflicting values in medicine called values-based practice. Ordinary language philosophy (as exemplified by Austin and others of the mid-twentieth-century "Oxford school") focuses on our use of words as a (sometimes) useful first step in coming to a more complete understanding of their meanings. The theory of values-based practice was developed by applying ideas from ordinary language philosophy to the long-running debate about the "boundary problem" presented by the concept of mental disorder. Ordinary language philosophy turns this debate topsy-turvy: it shows, (a) that the concept of mental disorder instead of being the target problem is a resource for coming to a more complete understanding of the meanings of concepts of disorder as a whole including the concept of bodily disorder; and correspondingly, (b) that the value-laden nature of mental disorder far from being part of the problem (to be solved either by limitation or outright elimination) points to an evaluative element of meaning in concepts of disorder as a whole, again including concepts of bodily disorder. It is these topsy-turvy results that underpin the development of values-based practice. In a brief concluding section we indicate the potential for further development of values-based practice supported by ordinary language and other philosophies particularly through engagement with non-Western language groups representing diverse traditions of thought and practice in mental health.

2019 ◽  
pp. 247-270
Author(s):  
Ken Hirschkop

Chapter 8 looks at ‘linguistic philosophy’ in middle and late Wittgenstein and in J. L. Austin. In ordinary language philosophy, myth emerged not from charismatic demagogues but from the fervid minds of scientistic intellectuals. Wittgenstein and Austin share the conviction that ‘language as such’ is the antidote to the metaphysical entanglements that arise from this scientism. But this ordinary version of ‘language as such’ is not simply present to the naked eye and ear, but is only available as the end result of strategies of philosophical clarification, which make language a manifestation of life. The chapter therefore focuses on Wittgenstein’s idea of the perspicuous representation and Austin’s techniques of drawing out distinctions. It turns out that clarification is an ambiguous exercise: Wittgenstein’s belief that ‘language always works’ runs aground when he compares language to music, which, it turns out, doesn’t work, at least not in the twentieth century.


2018 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-227
Author(s):  
K. W. M. Fulford

Abstract This article sets out key contributions to the long-running debate about mental disorder from the ordinary language philosophy of the ‘Oxford School’. The distinction between definition and use of concepts underpinning ordinary language philosophy reframes the debate as a debate not just about mental disorder but about disorder in general, bodily as well as mental. The field work of ordinary language philosophy (focusing on the use of concepts as a guide to their meanings) shows that, attempts at elimination notwithstanding, there is an essential evaluative element in the meaning of disorder, bodily as well as mental. The concept of disorder in the debate thus reframed presents a double challenge for analysis: to explain why disorder has evaluative connotations used of mental conditions but descriptive connotations used of bodily conditions. Philosophical value theory, derived by applying ordinary language philosophy to the language of values, provides a rich resource of ideas for meeting this double challenge. It meets the double challenge at the level of theory by allowing both aspects of the double challenge of disorder to be derived from a logical property that disorder shares with all other value terms. It meets the double challenge at the level of practice by supporting the development of a new approach to working with values alongside evidence in healthcare called values-based practice. Ordinary language philosophy, notwithstanding these several contributions, is no panacea. It helps us to make a start, no more and no less, in understanding mental disorder.


Author(s):  
Bill Fulford

AbstractPart II of this book illustrates the importance of cultural values in enriching the philosophical theory underpinning values-based mental health care. Building on the origins of values-based practice in ordinary language philosophy (see Chap. 1), the contributions of a culturally enriched theory to practice are illustrated by the roles, respectively, of aesthetics (Chap. 7), phenomenology (Chaps. 8 and 9), African philosophy (Chaps. 10 and 11) and feminist philosophy (Chap. 12). Chapters 13 and 14 in contrast illustrate how practice may also inform theory. They explore through a series of narrative examples, the boundary of the concept of mental disorder as represented by the contested relationship between spiritual/religious experiences and psychopathology. The selection of topics presented in this Part is representative, though far from exhaustive, of the scope for two-way engagement between culturally enriched philosophical theory and mental health practice.


2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 263-287
Author(s):  
Avner Baz

I start with two basic lines of response to Cartesian skepticism about the ‘external world’: in the first, which is characteristic of Analytic philosophers to this day, the focus is on the meaning of ‘know’—what it ‘refers’ to, its ‘semantics’ and its ‘pragmatics’; in the second, which characterizes Continental responses to Descartes, the focus is on the philosophizing or meditating subject, and its relation to its body and world. I argue that the first approach is hopeless: if the Cartesian worry that I could be dreaming right now so much as makes sense, the proposal that—under some theory of knowledge (or of ‘knowledge’)—my belief that I am sitting in front of the computer right now may still be (or truly count as) a piece of knowledge, would rightfully seem to the skeptic to be playing with words and missing the point. I then argue that the practice of Ordinary Language Philosophy, which has mostly been linked to the first line of response to Cartesian skepticism, may be seen as actually belonging with the second line of response; and I show how a form of what may be called “Existentialist Ordinary Language Philosophy” can be used to reveal the nonsensicality of the Cartesian skeptical worry. My argument takes its cue from Thompson Clarke’s insight—an insight that Clarke himself has not pursued far or accurately enough—that our concept of Dream is not a concept of the “standard type.”


Author(s):  
Luana Sion Li

This article discusses the influence of emerging linguistic philosophy theories in the 20th century on the development of analytical jurisprudence through an examination of the way those theories influenced the legal philosopher H. L. A. Hart. Although Hart is significantly influenced by linguistic philosophy, his legal theory could not have been developed solely with it. This is evidenced by Hart’s disownment of the essay Ascription of Responsibility and Rights, his attempt to employ ideas from ordinary language philosophy in the context of law. Hart’s theoretical development shows that he was above all not a linguistic, but a legal philosopher; and that analytical jurisprudence, albeit influenced by linguistic philosophy, depends on aspects beyond it.


Author(s):  
Avner Baz

The article presents, clarifies, defends, and shows the contemporary relevance of ordinary language philosophy (OLP), as a general approach to the understanding and dissolution of at least very many traditional and contemporary philosophical difficulties. The first section broadly characterizes OLP, points out its anticipation in Immanuel Kant’s dissolution of metaphysical impasses in the ‘Transcendental Dialectic’ of the Critique of Pure Reason, and then shows its contemporary relevance by bringing its perspective to bear on the recent debates concerning the philosophical ‘method of cases’. The second section responds to a series of common objections to, and misunderstandings of, OLP.


Author(s):  
G. A. Zolotkov

The article examines the change of theoretical framework in analytic philosophy of mind. It is well known fact that nowadays philosophical problems of mind are frequently seen as incredibly difficult. It is noteworthy that the first programs of analytical philosophy of mind (that is, logical positivism and philosophy of ordinary language) were skeptical about difficulty of that realm of problems. One of the most notable features of both those programs was the strong antimetaphysical stance, those programs considered philosophy of mind unproblematic in its nature. However, the consequent evolution of philosophy of mind shows evaporating of that stance and gradual recovery of the more sympathetic view toward the mind problematic. Thus, there were two main frameworks in analytical philosophy of mind: 1) the framework of logical positivism and ordinary language philosophy dominated in the 1930s and the 1940s; 2) the framework that dominated since the 1950s and was featured by the critique of the first framework. Thus, the history of analytical philosophy of mind moves between two highly opposite understandings of the mind problematic. The article aims to found the causes of that move in the ideas of C. Hempel and G. Ryle, who were the most notable philosophers of mind in the 1930s and the 1940s.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document