Theoretical Strategies to Define Disability

Jonas-Sébastien Beaudry
{"title":"Theoretical Strategies to Define Disability","authors":"Jonas-Sébastien Beaudry","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190622879.013.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of disability is used across a variety of contexts to describe different phenomena and prescribe distinct behaviors or norms. The definitional challenge is not only that the category of “disabled people” is heterogenous, but also that what “disability” should denote, primarily or exclusively, is controversial among both theorists and practitioners. This conceptual breadth is far from innocuous: disability models have the potential to influence public policies, culture, and interactions by suggesting what rights, duties, and social expectations disability entails. Instead of examining those various definitions and arguing in favor of one, this chapter considers the unavoidable cultural polysemy of disability and contrasts the appeal and limitations of the main theoretical strategies to manage it. Some disability models deny that competing understandings of disability are valid, others seek to determine procedures through which disabilities will be defined and assessed, and still others conceptualize disability in a more culturally malleable way.","PeriodicalId":386445,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Disability","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Disability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190622879.013.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The concept of disability is used across a variety of contexts to describe different phenomena and prescribe distinct behaviors or norms. The definitional challenge is not only that the category of “disabled people” is heterogenous, but also that what “disability” should denote, primarily or exclusively, is controversial among both theorists and practitioners. This conceptual breadth is far from innocuous: disability models have the potential to influence public policies, culture, and interactions by suggesting what rights, duties, and social expectations disability entails. Instead of examining those various definitions and arguing in favor of one, this chapter considers the unavoidable cultural polysemy of disability and contrasts the appeal and limitations of the main theoretical strategies to manage it. Some disability models deny that competing understandings of disability are valid, others seek to determine procedures through which disabilities will be defined and assessed, and still others conceptualize disability in a more culturally malleable way.
界定残疾的理论策略
残疾的概念在各种情况下被用来描述不同的现象和规定不同的行为或规范。定义上的挑战不仅在于“残疾人”的范畴是异质的,而且“残疾”主要或专门指什么,在理论家和实践者之间都存在争议。这种概念的广度远非无害的:残疾模型有可能影响公共政策、文化和互动,通过暗示残疾所带来的权利、义务和社会期望。本章并没有对这些不同的定义进行考察和争论,而是考虑残疾不可避免的文化多义性,并对比了管理残疾的主要理论策略的吸引力和局限性。一些残疾模型否认对残疾的相互矛盾的理解是有效的,另一些模型试图确定残疾的定义和评估程序,还有一些模型以一种更具文化可塑性的方式将残疾概念化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信