Immunology of the “sensible world” and of the “intelligible world”: the evolutionary decline and the “constructed reality”

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The term “immunity” was introduced in medicine due to Ilya Mechnikov. However, the concept of infection resistance existed in European culture long before Mechnikov in the form of s.c. “vital force”. According to holistic methodology, the history of immunology can be divided into three unequal periods: 1) vitalistic – from antiquity to the discoveries of Mechnikov and Ehrlich; 2) “Mechnikov time” (1890s – 1916); and 3) a post-Mechnikov period (1916 – present). At the beginning of 18th century, the existence of “vital force” ideas created the possibility to adapt variolation in Europe, which was based on medieval magical-mystical concepts. Without generalizing of variolation experience, Edward Jenner would hardly have been able to discover vaccination. Scientific ideas of Mechnikov were not a categorical denial of the previous period of immunology. For almost 20 years, he himself had to fend off teleological and vitalistic accusations from the side of those biologists who denied the possibility of phagocytes to act expediently. An analogy helped Mechnikov to confirm his intuition was the phenomenon of intracellular digestion of amoebas or ciliates. Besides, he experimentally proved that phagocytosis was the product of evolution and not a “god gift”. However, in his works, Mechnikov also addressed to the category of “healing forces of the body.” Modern immunology now faces a number of theoretical contradictions and methodological difficulties related to reductionists paradigm: as far as the “split” between the world of “immune objects” (immune cells receptors, antibodies, cytokines, etc.) and “subjectness” of its basic categories “self-nonself”, “immune aggression, “immune defence”, etc., Ilya Mechnikov tried to overcome this contradiction substantiating the phenomenon of phagocytosis as functional system acting in accordance with defense purpose. The construction of “holistic” subject-object models of immunity (such as the symbiosis model of plant immunity) could be a way of overcoming the aforementioned contradictions.

About the authors

M. V. Goloviznin

Russian University of Medicine

Author for correspondence.
Email: mvasilef@mail.ru

PhD, MD (Medicine), Associate Professor, Department of Internal Diseases, Dental Faculty

Russian Federation, Moscow

V. I. Moiseev

Russian University of Medicine

Email: mvasilef@mail.ru

PhD, MD (Philosophy), Professor, Head, Department of Philosophy, Bioethics and Humanities

Russian Federation, Moscow

V. T. Timofeev

N. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Email: mvasilef@mail.ru

PhD, MD (Medicine), Chief Research Associate, A. Nesterov Department of Faculty Therapy, Medical Faculty

Russian Federation, Moscow

N. S. Lakhonina

Russian University of Medicine

Email: mvasilef@mail.ru

Assistant, Department of Internal Diseases, Dental Faculty

Russian Federation, Moscow

Yu. R. Buldakova

Russian University of Medicine

Email: mvasilef@mail.ru

PhD (Medicine), Associate Professor, Department of Internal Diseases, Dental Faculty

Russian Federation, Moscow

References

  1. Головизнин М.В., Моисеев В.И., Тимофеев В.Т., Лахонина Н.С., Булдакова Ю.Р. Проблема сконструированной реальности в иммунологии. История и современность // Восьмой Российский философский конгресс. Философия в полицентричном мире. Круглые столы. Сборник научных статей. М., 2021, 1250 с. [Goloviznin M.V., Moiseev V.I., Timofeev V.T., Lakhonina N.S., Buldakova Yu.R. The problem of “constructed reality” in immunology. History and Modernity. The Eight’s Russia Philosophy Congress. Philosophy in the Polycentric World. Round tables. Collocted works]. Moscow, 2021. 1250 p.
  2. Головизнин М.В., Тимофеев В.Т. Симбиоз как перспективная аксиологическая модель работы иммунной системы (на примере иммунитета растений) // Философские проблемы биологии и медицины. Выпуск 16. М., 2022. 214 с. [Goloviznin M.V., Timofeev V.T. Simbyosis as prospective axiological model of immune system activity (using the example of plant immunity). Philosophical Problems of Biology and Medicine, Vol. 16]. Moscow, 2022. 214 p.
  3. Мечников И.И. О целебных силах организма. Акад. собр. соч. М.: Медгиз, 1950. Т. 6. 368 с. [Mechnikov I.I. On the healing powers of the body. Collected works]. Moscow: Medgiz, 1950. Vol. 6. 368 p.
  4. Мечников И.И. О целебных силах организма. Акад. собр. соч. М.: Медгиз, 1952. Т. 7. 564 с. [Mechnikov I.I. On the healing powers of the body. Collected works]. Moscow: Medgiz, 1952. Vol. 7. 564 p.
  5. Петров Р.В «Я или не я» (Иммунологические мобили). М.: Молодая гвардия, 1983. 273 с. [Petrov R.V. “Me or not me” (immune mobilities). Moscow: Molodaya gvardiya, 1983. 273 p.
  6. Martin E. Flexible Bodies: Tracking Immunity in American Culture. From the Days of Polio to the Age of AIDS. Beacon Press; 1994, 319 p.
  7. Turney J. Beyond cell wars; 2016. Available at: https://aeon.co/essays/why-we-should-guard-against-military-notions-of-immunity (Date of the application March 15, 2024).

Copyright (c) 2024 Goloviznin M.V., Moiseev V.I., Timofeev V.T., Lakhonina N.S., Buldakova Y.R.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies