Dr. Sabrina Coninx is a research associate at the Chair of Philosophy at the Ruhr University Bochum. Supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG), she conducts research there on empirically supported philosophy in the context of pain, emotions, affective disorders, and clinical practice. She is the author of the book “Experiencing Pain: A Scientific Enigma and Its Philosophical Solution.” On November 19, you can see Dr. Sabrina Coninx, together with Dr. Peter Stilwell, presenting a lecture at our ONLINE CONFERENCE 2021: “Philosophical Reflections on Pain, Persons, and Practice.” REGISTER NOW https://web.cvent.com/event/e52b2684-e9a5-4ef1-9e61-f3eb9bc1f042/summary Learn more about Dr. Sabrina Coninx in our interview: WHAT WAS YOUR PERSONAL MOTIVATION TO BECOME A PHILOSOPHER OF SCIENCE? I have always been interested in the philosophical aspects of science, where concepts and theoretical assumptions are explained and questioned. At the same time, I wanted to base my philosophical work on current empirical findings and contribute to scientific discourse. Interdisciplinary collaborations and research groups are an excellent way to explore and utilize the connections between philosophy and science. WHAT FASCINATES YOU ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND THE TREATMENT OF CHRONIC PAIN? In general pain research, I have been fascinated from the beginning by the fact that pain is such a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. Regarding pain treatment, I was interested in which theoretical assumptions about pain are made in research and practice, and how philosophical theories can contribute to the corresponding debate. I believe that philosophical assumptions about pain play a central role in pain research and treatment, whether we are aware of it or not. One of my interests is therefore to examine these assumptions, question them, and explore empirically and philosophically grounded alternatives. WHAT COULD BE SOME CLINICALLY RELEVANT OUTCOMES OF YOUR RESEARCH FOR OSTEOPATHY? My research primarily aims to create an empirically grounded framework for what pain is and how it arises. At the same time, I hope that this work can also provide a toolkit for thinking about pain and approaching it in new ways. In close collaboration with Peter Stilwell, I am investigating, among other things, what practical consequences various theoretical assumptions can have in clinical application and how our own enactive framework fits into this debate. Ideally, this research can encourage clinical practitioners to carefully examine their own theoretical assumptions about pain, its causation, and its management. Our goal is not to present a universal solution, but to provide impulses for new ways of thinking and the methodological and conceptual tools to do so. Three aspects are of central importance to our own approach. First, we hold the view that pain treatment should not only look for an underlying physiological cause, but must focus on the patient as a whole. Second, chronic pain should be viewed as a dynamic process in which many different factors interact in a non-linear fashion. Third, we argue that chronic pain fundamentally changes the way a person perceives themselves, their body, and their environment. Pain management could help patients recognize positive options for change, see themselves as capable of taking action, and engage meaningfully with their environment. COULD YOU GIVE US A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF YOUR LATEST RESEARCH WORK AND WHAT SURPRISED YOU DURING YOUR RESEARCH? I have recently been working on three different papers. First, in the recently published paper with Peter Stilwell, “Pain and the Field of Affordances – An Enactive Approach to Acute and Chronic Pain,” we develop an enactive approach to chronic pain and its treatment. We conceptualize the differences between acute and chronic pain, as well as the process of chronification, in terms of changes in the field of affordances. That is, in relation to the possibilities for action perceived by pain patients. In doing so, we aim to do justice to both the lived experience of patients and the dynamic role of behavioral learning, neural reorganization, and socio-cultural practices in the development and maintenance of pain. In particular, we want to demonstrate the relevance of such an enactive framework as a heuristic for treatment. Second, in my forthcoming essay, “The Notorious Neurophilosophy of Pain: A Family Resemblance Approach to Idiosyncrasy and Generalizability,” I argue that there is nothing common to all pains and only to pains, even if they may subjectively appear to us as a phenomenologically unified class of phenomena. The contribution takes a closer look at the central neural processes involved in pain. At the same time, I do not agree with eliminative approaches that argue we cannot make empirically adequate and scientifically useful generalizations about pain. In contrast, I advocate a theory that addresses the variability and differences between scientific debates, investigations, and practices, and attempts to show how a pragmatic compromise can be found between the uniqueness of each individual pain case and the need for generalizability in science. Third, in my recently published essay, “A Multidimensional Phenomenal Space for Pain: Structure, Primitiveness, and Utility,” I discuss the relationship between the subjective feeling that unites pains and distinguishes them from other experiences, and the phenomenal properties of a sensory, affective, and evaluative nature along which pains typically vary. I use a new perspective by constructing a multidimensional phenomenal space for pain, the structure of which reflects phenomenal similarities and dissimilarities through spatial distance. The work focuses on the question of whether the constructed phenomenal space proves to be necessary and sufficient for pain. It is concluded that such a space does not exist, but that references to the multidimensional phenomenal space can nonetheless be of great use for philosophical and scientific discourse. What interests me most in all these different projects is that pain is complex and that there are many areas where we must be aware of our own limitations in dealing with pain. However, this does not mean that we are condemned to inactivity; rather, it should motivate us to accept complexities and uncertainties and find ways to deal with them in a fruitful manner. Here too, I believe that interdisciplinary exchange plays a central role in such a project. CAN YOU TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR LECTURE AT THIS YEAR’S ONLINE CONFERENCE, WHICH WILL DEAL WITH THE TOPIC “PHILOSOPHICAL REFLECTIONS ON PAIN, PERSONS, AND PRACTICE”? In recent years, the societal and personal impacts of pain and the fact that there are still no effective treatment methods have prompted researchers from various disciplines to develop new ways of thinking about pain and its treatment. This is also the starting point for my joint lecture with Peter Stilwell, which is based on three central parts. First, it will be shown which philosophical assumptions still dominate current clinical practice and what problems are associated with them. The focus is on biomechanical, fragmented, and linear approaches to pain and pain management. Second, we develop an enactive alternative that gives more space to the lived experience of patients and their perceived possibilities for action as they change during the process of chronification. At the same time, we attempt to do justice to the plurality and complexity of heterogeneous yet dynamically intertwined aspects that can contribute to pain and its chronification. Finally, we explore the concrete consequences of our enactive approach for clinical practice. MORE INFORMATION ABOUT OUR ONLINE CONFERENCE 2021 CAN BE FOUND ON OUR WEBSITE https://www.osteopathie-schule.de/online-conference-2021/
English Version
DO YOU KNOW DR. SABRINA CONINX? Dr. Sabrina Coninx is a research associate at the Chair of Philosophy at the Ruhr University Bochum. Supported by the German Research Foundation, she conducts research there on empirically supported philosophy in the context of pain, emotions, affective disorders, and clinical practice. She is the author of the book “Experiencing Pain: A Scientific Enigma and Its Philosophical Solution.” On November 19, Together with Dr. Peter Stilwell, Dr. Sabrina Coninx will give a lecture at our ONLINE CONFERENCE 2021 : “Philosophical reflections on pain, persons and practice” JOIN NOWhttps://web.cvent.com/event/e52b2684-e9a5-4ef1-9e61-f3eb9bc1f042/summaryLearn more about Dr. Sabrina Coninx in our interview:WHAT WAS YOUR PERSONAL MOTIVATION TO BECOME A SCIENTIFIC PHILOSOPHER?I have always been interested in philosophical aspects of science in which concepts and theoretical assumptions are explicated and questioned. At the same time, I wanted to ground my philosophical work in recent empirical results and contribute to the scientific discourse. Interdisciplinary collaborations and research groups are a great way to explore and exploit the connections between philosophy and science.WHAT FASCINATES YOU ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND CHRONIC PAIN MANAGEMENT?In the general study of pain, I was fascinated from the beginning by the fact that pain is such a complex and multi-layered phenomenon. With respect to pain management, I was interested to see which theoretical assumptions about pain are made in research and practice and in which manner philosophical theories might contribute to corresponding debate. I think that philosophical assumptions concerning pain play a central role in pain research and management, whether we are aware of it or not. One interest of mine has therefore been to study these assumptions, to question them, and to explore empirically and philosophically informed alternatives.WHAT COULD BE SOME CLINICALLY RELEVANT OUTCOMES FOR OSTEOPATHS FROM YOUR RESEARCH?My research primarily aims to provide an empirically informed framework of what pain is and how it is brought about. At the same time, I hope that this work can also provide a toolbox to think about and approach pain in new ways. In close cooperation with Peter Stilwell, I study, among others, which practical consequences different theoretical assumptions can have in clinical application and how our own enactive framework is located within this debate. At best, this research might encourage clinical practitioners to carefully study their own theoretical assumptions about pain, its causation, and management. Our aim is not to present a universal solution, but to provide impulses to think in new ways and to provide the methodological and conceptual tools to do so. Three aspects have been central to our own approach. First, we argue that addressing pain should involve more than looking for an underlying physiological cause and should focus instead on the patient as a whole. Second, chronic pain should be considered a dynamic process in which many different factors interact in non-linear ways. Third, we argue that chronic pain fundamentally changes the way a person perceives themselves, their body, and their environment. Pain management could help patients notice positive options for change and see themselves as capable of taking action and meaningfully engaging with their environment.COULD YOU GIVE US A SHORT OVERVIEW OF YOUR LATEST RESEARCH PAPER AND WHAT SURPRISED YOU IN YOUR RESEARCH?I have recently been working on three different papers. First, in the recently published paper with Peter Stilwell, “Pain and the Field of Affordances – An Enactive Approach to Acute and Chronic Pain”, we develop an enactive approach to chronic pain and its treatment. We conceptualize differences between acute and chronic pain, as well as the process of chronification, in terms of changes in the field of affordance. This is, in terms of the possibilities for action perceived by subjects in pain. As such, we aim to do justice to the lived experience of patients as well as the dynamic role of behavioral learning, neural reorganization, and socio-cultural practices in the generation and maintenance of pain. In particular, we aim to prove the relevance of such enactive framework as a heuristic in treatment. Second, in my forthcoming paper “The Notorious Neurophilosophy of Pain: A Family Resemblance Approach to Idiosyncrasy and Generalizability”, I argue that there is nothing common to all pains and pains only, even if, subjectively, they may appear to us as a phenomenologically unified class of phenomena. The paper thereby takes a closer look at the central neural processes involved in pain. At the same time, I do not agree with eliminative approaches arguing that we cannot make any empirically adequate and scientifically useful generalizations about pain. In contrast, I defend a theory that takes up the variability and differences between scientific debates, investigations, and practices and tries to show how a pragmatic trade-off can be made between the uniqueness of each pain case and the need for generalizability in science. Third, in my recently published paper “A Multidimensional Phenomenal Space for Pain: Structure, Primitiveness, and Utility”, I discuss the relation between the subjective feeling, which unites pains and distinguishes them from other experiences, and the phenomenal properties of sensory, affective, and evaluative character along which pains typically vary. I employ a new perspective by constructing a multidimensional phenomenal space for pain whose structure reflects phenomenal similarities and dissimilarities by means of spatial distance. At the center of the paper is the question whether the constructed phenomenal space proves necessary and sufficient for pain. It is concluded that there is no space of this kind, but that references to the multidimensional phenomenal space can still be of great benefit for philosophical and scientific discourses. What is most interesting to me across all these different projects is that pain is complex and that there are many areas where we need to be aware of our own limitations in dealing with pain. However, the point is not that this condemns us to inactivity, but that it should motivate us to accept complexities and uncertainties and find ways to deal with them in a fruitful manner. Again, I think that interdisciplinary exchange plays a central role for such project. CAN YOU GIVE US AN EXPLANATION ABOUT YOUR LECTURE AT OUR ONLINE CONFERENCE THIS YEAR, WHICH WILL TALK ABOUT „PHILOSOPHICAL REFLECTIONS ON PAIN, PERSONS AND PRACTICE“? In recent years, the societal and personal impacts of pain, and the fact that we still lack an effective method of treatment, has motivated researchers from diverse disciplines to try to think in new ways about pain and its management. This is also the starting point of my joint lecture with Peter Stilwell which is based on three central parts. First, we identify which philosophical assumptions still dominate recent clinical practice and which problems they are associated with. The focus will be on biomechanical, fragmented, and linear approaches to pain and pain management. Second, we develop an enactive alternative that gives more space to the lived experience of patients and their perceived possibilities of action as they change in the process of chronification. At the same time, we aim to do justice to the plurality and complexity of heterogenous yet dynamically intertwined aspects that may contribute to pain and its chronification. Finally, we explore the concrete consequences of our enactive approach for clinical practice. MORE INFORMATION ABOUT OUR ONLINE CONFERENCE 2021 YOU CAN FIND ON OUR WEBSITE https://www.osteopathie-schule.de/online-conference-2021/
