Abstract
In this paper, we highlight some problems for accounts of disability and enhancement that have not been sufficiently addressed in the literature. The reason, we contend, is that contemporary debates that seek to define, characterise or explain the normative valence of disability and enhancement do not pay sufficient attention to (1) a wide range of cases, and (2) the transition between one state and another. In section one, we provide seven cases that might count as disability or enhancement. We explain why (with the exception of the first two, which lay the groundwork for the others) each case might count, and on what basis, and why it is been neglected. Each case is explained as a transition in what we call capacity space. We then argue that no definition of disability or enhancement addresses all of these cases, except for strict welfarist accounts of disability that do not rely on a depiction of any particular capacity. We argue further, however, that this is a serious deficiency of welfarist conceptions of disability. We then address objections to our account.
Funder
Greenwall Foundation
National Science Foundation
Subject
Health Policy,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health (social science)
Reference40 articles.
1. Barnes E . The minority body. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2016.
2. Hall M . The bioethics of enhancement: Transhumanism, disability, and Biopolitics. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016.
3. Tremain S . Foucault and feminist philosophy of disability. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2017.
4. Kaposy C . Choosing Down syndrome. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2018.
5. Kittay EF . Learning from my daughter: Valuing disabled minds and caring that matters. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2019.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献