Canguilhem Summary

In Canguilhem’s writings, he examines the definitions of pathological, normal, and health, providing his philosophical interpretation. Canguilhem believes the medical interpretation of these definitions to be flawed, and offers an alternative approach to understanding these concepts.

In terms of the pathological, Canguilhem supports the views of philosopher Bichat, who argues for pathology as merely an alteration to vital organization (predetermination). As an alteration, rather than abhorrence, pathology need not maintain its negative connotation. Conventionally, the pathological is thought of as something that is wrong or bad, evoking a negative stigma. Canguilhem challenges convention, proclaiming that by treating the pathological as a singularity, we promote its defective nature. Rather, he aligns disease with individual differences, positing, “The anomal is simply the different.” The pathological is no longer a chip off the shoulder of perfection; merely, an augmented state of being. Canguilhem elaborates: “Disease—the pathological state—is not the loss of a norm but the aspect of a life regulated by norms that are vitally inferior or depreciated.”

Based on his arguments for the pathological, Canguilhem asserts that the term “normal” becomes ambiguous and irrelevant. He argues against equating normal with archetypal, instead suggesting that it is prototypical. In terms of genetics, Canguilhem examines the meaning of normal as “an average trait.” Divergence from this normal is not pathological, but rather, diversifying. Normal, in this sense, differs from the normal typically evoked when regarding health. The archetypal definition does not hold if the pathological is no longer a divergent from normal. In this case, there is no deficit, rather, many different states of normal. Canguilhem renders normalcy invalid due to its ambiguous form and inability to juxtapose pathological.

In discussing health, Canguilhem bolsters his views on what is considered pathological versus normal. He argues that health is the true opposite of pathological, rather than, normal. Disease does not exist solely on the biological level; it is only relevant in relation to the alteration of the human essence, or “milieu.” A change in symptoms is not indicative of pathology, unless it has a troubling effect on a person’s wellbeing. Therefore, Canguilhem believes health encompasses an “adaptation to a personal milieu.” Health is just as much a factor of the human psyche, as it is a factor of biology. Being unhealthy is generalized as the inability to cope with an augmented state of being, or in the words of Canguilhem: “What characterizes health is a capacity to tolerate variations in norms…”

Canguilhem approaches the concepts of the pathological, normal, and health, from a holistic perspective. He argues that normal is irrelevant, and that the pathological is the true antonym of health. His perspective is vastly different from that of most health professionals, who regard the pathological and disease as a bastardization of health and humanity. Rather, Canguilhem accepts disease as an integral part of life, and eradicates the concept of a malevolent “abnormal.”

Works Cited

Canguilhem, Georges. “The Normal and the Pathological.” Knowledge of Life. Trans. Stefanos Geroulanos and Daniela Ginsburg. New York: Fordham UP, 2008. 121-133.