Many pathological patterns are nonspecific. The same inflammation can result from different triggers such as infection, toxins and genetics. In an attempt to figure out the relevant link for a patient, pathologists say “this is the pattern and these are the likely categories of cause.”
NOT “this is exactly why it happened in this person at this time.”
We are given only part of “the why,” not a complete, single-cause explanation, and that matches a lot of real-world practice. The article above headlines: WHY autoimmune diseases … but never gets past the WHAT. The medical establishment conflates the two; or perhaps it is we who fool ourselves about the why by focusing on the what.
Pathology is strongest at describing what is going wrong in tissues or fluids and at narrowing the list of possible causes, but it does not always pinpoint one definitive underlying reason on its own. Instead we learn more about the biological mechanism and immediate cause, not the deeper personal or environmental reasons. Why did the mal-exposure occur in the first place or why did my immune system respond in a certain way?
We should not stop at “this is what is happening and how.” We should keep going and try to figure out the why for ourselves.
We often defer to pathology, and even pathologize ourselves on purpose, in order to manifest a seemingly objective, nameable explanation for suffering. This reduces our impression of uncertainty, sometimes it can bring access to help; and unconsciously it’s almost certainly done for a sense of belonging.
Naming a condition can make chaotic experiences feel structured and understandable …
Listen to this episode with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Pulp Conversations to listen to this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.
