Contents
4 found
Order:
  1. The Minority Body: A Theory of Disability, by Elizabeth Barnes. [REVIEW]Chong-Ming Lim - 2022 - Mind 131 (522):650–659.
    A review of Elizabeth Barnes' The Minority Body.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. The (In)Compatibility of the Privation Theory of Evil and the Mere-Difference View of Disability.Nicholas Colgrove - 2020 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 20 (2):329-348.
    The privation theory of evil (PTE) states that evil is the absence of some good that is supposed to be present. For example, if vision is an intrinsic good, and if human beings are supposed to have vision, then PTE implies that a human being’s lacking vision is an evil, or a bad state of affairs. The mere-difference view of disability (MDD) states that disabilities like blindness are not inherently bad. Therefore, it would seem that lacking sight is not a (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Disability as Inability.Alex Gregory - 2020 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 18 (1):23-48.
    If we were to write down all those things that we ordinarily categorise as disabilities, the resulting list might appear to be extremely heterogeneous. What do disabilities have in common? In this paper I defend the view that disabilities should be understood as particular kinds of inability. I show how we should formulate this view, and in the process defend the view from various objections. For example, I show how the view can allow that common kinds of inability are not (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4. Disabilities Are Also Legitimately Medically Interesting Constraints on Legitimate Interests.Chong-Ming Lim - 2018 - Mind 127 (508):977-1002.
    What is it for something to be a disability? Elizabeth Barnes, focusing on physical disabilities, argues that disability is a social category. It depends on the rules undergirding the judgements of the disability rights movement. Barnes’ account may strike many as implausible. I articulate the unease, in the form of three worries about Barnes’ account. It does not fully explain why the disability rights movement is constituted in such a way that it only picks out paradigmatic disability traits, nor why (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations