Skip to main content
Log in

On the Normativity of the Immune System

  • Published:
Medicine Studies

Abstract

In the 1940s, Georges Canguilhem has established the concept of biological normativity on the level of the organism in his key work on “The Normal and the Pathological”. We would like to present a contemporary analysis of Canguilhem’s work, set it in context with more recent results from the field of complexity and immunology, and evaluate the problematic whether normativity is a genuine capacity of the organism. Based on Canguilhem’s conditions of the definition of biological normativity, we show that the immune system as one of the complex systems of the living equally shares the capacity to be normative. We will then conclude that normativity can also be conceptually independently displayed on the level of complex systems of the living.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A nominal analysis of the concept of Normativity has been previously established by Korsgaard (1996).

  2. Hucklenbroich (2007: 77–90).

  3. A very comprehensive introduction to the life and work of Canguilhem has been written by Debru (2004); alternatively: Borck (2005).

  4. Canguilhem (1943).

  5. Jerne (1974: 373–389).

  6. Leriche (1936).

  7. Canguilhem (1965: 159).

  8. Trnka (2003: 431).

  9. Walliser (1977).

  10. Canguilhem (1966).

  11. Bernard (1984).

  12. Kauffman (1993).

  13. Canguilhem (1978: 121).

  14. Canguilhem (1994).

  15. Canguilhem (1978: 68).

  16. Canguilhem (1978: 138).

  17. The following papers should give an overview on the field of immune tolerance: Sakaguchi et al. (2008), St. Clair et al. (2007), Keir et al. (2008).

  18. Canguilhem (1978: 124).

  19. Canguilhem (1978: 121).

  20. Canguilhem (1978: 129).

  21. Pradeu and Carosella (2006).

  22. A developed analysis of biologic identity has been presented by: Pradeu (2006). There is an elaborated literature in the field of actions of the individual (e.g., Frankfurt HG “The Problem of Action”, American Philosophical Quarterly, 15: 157–162) but this does not take into account actions of other organized entities such as systems, which lack a single agent. Further interdisciplinary analysis would be needed in order to obtain clarification on action in such entities.

  23. Canguilhem (1978: 124f).

  24. Canguilhem (1978: 72).

  25. Canguilhem (1978: 76).

  26. Canguilhem (1978: 81).

  27. Canguilhem (1978: 108).

  28. Canguilhem (1978: 121).

  29. Trnka (2003: 431).

  30. Goldstein (1951: 178).

  31. Hardcastle (2002: 149f).

  32. Canguilhem (1978).

  33. Ashby (1948: 380).

  34. Von Bertalanffy: (1973).

  35. Walliser (1977: 27).

  36. Debru (1993: 113–114).

  37. Kauffman (1993).

  38. Kauffman (1993: 192).

  39. Kauffman (1993: 170 ff).

  40. Goldstein (1933: 430).

  41. Fawcett translates “comportement privilégié” as preferential behaviour. We would like to point out that Canguilhem’s original terms state that such behavior may not only represent a preference but also be rooted in a privilege, i.e., “being invested with a privilege/special freedom or immunity/granted with a particular right or immunity”, Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition, Vol. XII, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989, p. 523.

  42. Canguilhem (1978: 107).

  43. Goldstein (1951: 345).

  44. Canguilhem (1978: 137).

  45. Canguilhem (1978: 121).

References

  • Ashby, W.R. 1948. The homeostat. Electron 20: 380.

  • Bernard, C. 1984. Introduction à l’étude de la médecine expérimentale. Paris: Flammarion.

  • Borck, C. 2005. Erkenntnis des Lebenden. Eine Skizze zu Georges Canguilhem. In Maß und Eigensinn: Studien im Anschluß an Georges Canguilhem, eds. C. Borck, V. Hess, and H. Schmidgen. München: Wilhelm Fink.

  • Canguilhem, G. 1943. Essai sur quelques problèmes concernant le normal et le pathologique. Clermont-Ferrand: Publications de la faculté des lettres de l’université de Strasbourg, fascicule 100.

  • Canguilhem, G. 1965. La connaissance de la vie, 159. Paris: Vrin.

  • Canguilhem, G. 1966. Le Normal et le Pathologique, 138. Presses Universitaires de France. Translation: Canguilhem, G. 1978. On the normal and the pathological. In Studies in the history of modern science, Vol. 3, eds. by Cohen, Robert S., Hiebert, Erwin N., and I. Everett. Mendelsohn (trans: Carolyn, R., Fawcett D.), 121. Dordrecht/Boston: Reidel Publishing Company.

  • Canguilhem, G. 1994. L’idée de la médecine expérimentale selon Claude Bernard, Etudes d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences concernant le vivant et la vie. Paris: Vrin.

  • Debru, C. 1993. Georges Canguilhem et la normativité du pathologique: dimensions épistémologiques et éthiques. In Georges Canguilhem, philosophe et historien des sciences. Actes du colloque (6.8. Décembre 1990), 113–114. Paris: Albin Michel.

  • Debru, C. 2004. Georges Canguilhem, science et non-science. Paris: Editions Rue d’Ulm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, K. 1933. L’analyse de l’aphasie et l’étude de l’essence du langage. Journal de Psychologie 30: 430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, K. 1951. La Structure de l’Organisme, 178. Paris: Gallimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardcastle, V.G. 2002. On the normativity of functions. In Functions: New essays in the philosophy of psychology and biology, ed. A. Ariew, R. Cummins, and M. Perlman, 149f. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hucklenbroich, P. 2007. Krankheit—Begriffsklärung und Grundlagen einer Krankheitstheorie. Erwägen Wissen Ethik 18(1): 77–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jerne, N.K. 1974. Towards a network theory of the immune system. Annales d’Immunologie (Paris) 125C(1–2): 373–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. 1993. The origins of order: Self-organization and selection in evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keir, M.E., M.J. Butte, G.J. Freeman, and Sharpe. 2008. PD-1 and its ligands in tolerance and immunity. Annual Review of Immunology 26: 677–704.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, C.M. 1996. The sources of normativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leriche, R. 1936. De la santé à la maladie. La douleur dans les maladies; Où va la médecine? In Encyclopédie française Tome VI. L'être humain, eds. A. de Monzie, L. Febvre, G. Berger, and R. Leriche. Paris: Société de l’Encyclopédie française.

  • Pradeu, T., and E. Carosella. 2006. L’identité en immunologie: soi ou continuité? In L’Identité. Soi et non-soi, individu et personne, eds. E. Carosella, T. Pradeu, B. Saint-Sernin, and C. Debru. Paris: PUF.

  • Pradeu, T., and E. Carosella. 2006. The self model and the conception of biological identity in immunology. Biology and Philosophy 21(2): 235–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakaguchi, S., T. Yamaguchi, T. Nomura, and M. Ono. 2008. Regulatory T cells and immune tolerance. Cell 30(133): 775–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • St. Clair, E.W. 2007. New reagents on the horizon for immune tolerance. Annual Review of Medicine 58: 329–346.

  • Trnka, P. 2003. Subjectivity and values in medicine: The case of Canguilhem. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28(4): 431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Bertalanffy, L. 1973. General system theory. Harmondsworth: Penguin University Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walliser, B. 1977. Systèmes et modèles. Introduction critique à l’analyse de systèmes. Paris: Seuil.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amin T. Turki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Turki, A.T. On the Normativity of the Immune System. Medicine Studies 3, 29–39 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12376-011-0061-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12376-011-0061-9

Keywords

Navigation