In this paper I present and compare the philosophies and ideas behind naturalistic theories of health on the one hand and phenomenological theories of health on the other. The basic difference between the two sets of theories is no doubt that whereas naturalistic theories claim to rest on value neutral concepts, such as normal biological function, the phenomenological suggestions for theories of health take their starting point in what is often named intentionality: meaningful stances taken by the embodied person in experiencing and understanding her situation and taking action in the world.

Although naturalism and phenomenology are fundamentally different in their approach to understand and define health, they are not necessarily opposed when it comes to understanding the predicament of ill persons. Naturalism can afford phenomenology an important strategic importance in finding clues for medical investigations, just as phenomenology can envelop a naturalistic understanding of diseases. Furthermore, the two theories display similarities in their emphasis of embodiment as the central element of health theory and in their stress on the alien nature of the body displayed in illness. Theories of biology and phenomenology are, indeed, companionable and in many cases also mutually supportive in the realms of health and illness.