著者

水田 信

出版者

日本医学哲学・倫理学会

雑誌

医学哲学 医学倫理 (ISSN:02896427)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.21, pp.98-111, 2003-10-05 (Released:2018-02-01)

---

When we talk about the 'quality of life' (QOL) we should inquire just into the 'quality' of human life. Generally speaking, a qualitative thing includes something original that has no substitute. Each person's existence is an irreplaceable life, and it has a unique value. QOL is a subject about the qualitative values of human life. The pursuit of QOL is the pursuit of a 'healthy' human life or 'happiness.' E. Fromm said that a person represents the whole human being, and that an individual is a physico-spiritual totality. He also said that the goal of a person in life is to be himself. According to Fromm, the fundamental human desire aims to conquer 'existential dichotomies,' such as 'life and death,' 'solidarity and aloneness.' Everyone shows one's answer depending on his/her character or personality. Only a 'productive character' can get happiness through its answer. That is the basic attitude by which 'human nature' and 'individuality' are brought into full play at the same time. Such a person gropes for a 'sane society'. And such a society ought to bring up sound persons. QOL as elements of a living environment are useful as conditions for happiness. However, the most important thing is the 'quality' of each one's life itself. This kind of QOL is shown by the basic attitude as 'personality.' A person who lives a well-filled life has a high quality of life. The scale of quality of life as the standard common to human beings is 'human nature,' which is also the foundation of human equality. This is the 'basis' of human rights. And each person will be the judge of the matter connected with 'happiness, making use of the activation of individuality. So, medical persons should not confuse QOL and 'social usefulness! Medical preference order is not a problem of QOL but purely a problem of medical technique.

著者

水田 信

出版者

日本医学哲学・倫理学会

雑誌

医学哲学 医学倫理 (ISSN:02896427)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.13, pp.25-32, 1995-10-01 (Released:2018-02-01)

---

S. Kierkegaard pointed out that "despair" is a spiritual sickness, defining the human being-which is a synthesis of soul and body-as spirit in "Sickness unto Death". He said the possibility of this sickness is the human advantage over animal, and yet it is a drawback. V.E. Frankl, who was influenced in his thoughts and work by Kierkegaard, said that sickness is only in the sphere of psychophysical organization, not in the spiritual-personal sphere. Even neurosis is not a spiritual desease nor sickness in human spirituality. He also said that despair is human, and is not morbid. Frankl's "disease" has doubtlessly a narrower meaning than Kierkegaard's. However, can we acknowledge that "despair" is normal or sound in the human state ? As a matter of fact, there is a correspondence between some of Frankl's statements about "collective neurosis" and Kierkegaard's descriptions of forms of despair. So, we can expect that Kierkegaard's thought is useful to understanding Frankl's "logotherapy" or "existential analysis". Looking at it the other way around, it means that we can interpret Kierkegaard's ideas through knowledge of modern psychopathology. From this point of view, I would like to inquire into the essence of mental illness and to seak the key to recuperation from it.

著者

水田 信

出版者

大正大学

雑誌

比較思想研究 (ISSN:02862379)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.26, pp.61-64, 1999