Bridging Conversations

Abstract

Both Judith Butler and Eva Kittay have formulated an ethics centered around concepts of dependency and vulnerability. However, they take these concepts into divergent normative directions. I trace these differences back to the contrasting empirical examples that inform their respective takes on dependency. Borrowing the words of Eva Kittay, I analyze their arguments in terms of “paradigm cases” of dependency. For Kittay, the paradigm case supporting her thought is a person with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities; for Butler, it is a refugee. Drawing out these paradigm cases brings the theoretical tensions between Butler and Kittay into sharp relief. Rather than resolving them, I suggest using the paradigm cases as heuristic devices to examine dependency in actual care practices.