In defense of madness: The problem of disability

29Citations
Citations of this article
78Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

At a time when different groups in society are achieving notable gains in respect and rights, activists in mental health and proponents of mad positive approaches, such as Mad Pride, are coming up against considerable challenges. A particular issue is the commonly held view that madness is inherently disabling and cannot form the grounds for identity or culture. This paper responds to the challenge by developing two bulwarks against the tendency to assume too readily the view that madness is inherently disabling: The first arises from the normative nature of disability judgments, and the second arises from the implications of political activism in terms of being a social subject. In the process of arguing for these two bulwarks, the paper explores the basic structure of the social model of disability in the context of debates on naturalism and normativism, the applicability of the social model to madness, and the difference between physical and mental disabilities in terms of the unintelligibility often attributed to the latter.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rashed, M. A. (2019, March 16). In defense of madness: The problem of disability. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (United Kingdom). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhy016

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free