Social Inclusion Open Access Journal | ISSN: 2183-2803
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Social Inclusion Open Access Journal | ISSN: 2183-2803 Volume 4, Issue 4 (2016) HumanityHumanity asas aa ContestedContested Concept:Concept: RelationsRelations betweenbetween DisabilityDisability andand ‘Being‘Being Human’Human’ Editors Paul van Trigt, Alice Schippers and Jacqueline Kool Social Inclusion, 2016, Volume 4, Issue 4 Humanity as a Contested Concept: Relations between Disability and ‘Being Human’ Published by Cogitatio Press Rua Fialho de Almeida 14, 2º Esq., 1070-129 Lisbon Portugal Academic Editors Paul van Trigt, Leiden University, The Netherlands Alice Schippers, Disability Studies in Nederland, The Netherlands Jacqueline Kool, Disability Studies in Nederland, The Netherlands Available online at: www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion This issue is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY). Articles may be reproduced provided that credit is given to the original and Social Inclusion is acknowledged as the original venue of publication. Table of Contents Humanity as a Contested Concept: Relations between Disability and ‘Being Human’ Paul van Trigt, Jacqueline Kool and Alice Schippers 125–128 The Value of Inequality Gustaaf Bos and Doortje Kal 129–139 “I Am Human Too!” ‘Probeerruimte’ as Liminal Spaces in Search of Recognition Fiona MacLeod Budge and Harry Wels 140–149 Weighing Posthumanism: Fatness and Contested Humanity Sofia Apostolidou and Jules Sturm 150–159 Differences in Itself: Redefining Disability through Dance Carolien Hermans 160–167 Challenging Standard Concepts of ‘Humane’ Care through Relational Auto-Ethnography Alistair Niemeijer and Merel Visse 168–175 The Role of Human Values and Relations in the Employment of People with Work-Relevant Disabilities Lieke Kuiper, Minne Bakker and Jac van der Klink 176–187 Writing Disability into Colonial Histories of Humanitarianism Paul van Trigt and Susan Legêne 188–196 Social Inclusion (ISSN: 2183–2803) 2016, Volume 4, Issue 4, Pages 125–128 DOI: 10.17645/si.v4i4.754 Editorial Humanity as a Contested Concept: Relations between Disability and ‘Being Human’ Paul van Trigt 1,*, Jacqueline Kool 2 and Alice Schippers 2,3 1 Institute for History, Leiden University, 2311 BE Leiden, The Netherlands; E-Mail: [email protected] 2 Disability Studies in the Netherlands, Meet & Discover, 3811 HR Amersfoort, The Netherlands; E-Mails: [email protected] (J.K.), [email protected] (A.S.) 3 Department of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Centre, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands * Corresponding author Submitted: 2 September 2016 | Published: 10 November 2016 Abstract This editorial presents the theme and approach of the themed issue “Humanity as a Contested Concept: Relations between Disability and ‘Being Human’”. The way in which the concept of humanity is or must be related to disability is critically inves- tigated from different disciplinary perspectives in the themed issue, which is, moreover, situated in the field of disability studies and related to discussions about posthumanism. The argument is made that humanity is a concept that needs to be constantly reflected upon from a disability studies perspective. Finally, the contributions of the themed issue are briefly outlined. Keywords ableism; disability; humanity; posthumanism Issue This editorial is part of the issue “Humanity as a Contested Concept: Relations between Disability and ‘Being Human’”, edited by Paul van Trigt (Leiden University, The Netherlands), Alice Schippers (Disability Studies in Nederland, The Nether- lands) and Jacqueline Kool (Disability Studies in Nederland, The Netherlands). © 2016 by the authors; licensee Cogitatio (Lisbon, Portugal). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribu- tion 4.0 International License (CC BY). 1. Theme Humanity is often taken for granted, in both daily life and scientific research. In this project we critically What does it mean to be human? This question is dis- approach the concept of humanity through a disability cussed on an almost daily basis although not always ex- studies perspective. Humanity and disability are (possi- plicitly. Discussions about medical technologies, doping, bly) related in numerous ways. Historically, as argued by old age, human rights, and animal rights highlight how Hans Joas (2013), development of the notion of individ- concepts such as human and human dignity are con- ual human dignity was linked to processes of defining tested. Furthermore, they reveal the role played by im- groups (including the so-called ‘feeble minded’) as those plicit norms around humanity and its related concepts. that must be included in the human species. Today, we Our themed issue will explore and stimulate these dis- often observe that discourse about human dignity and cussions by investigating how, by whom, where, and why borders of the human race are determined by the notion the concept of humanity was, is, and can be used. This that disability leads to reduced quality of life. Also, recent means that we do not investigate what humanity really debates about human enhancement are often related to is, but how and why the concept of humanity is or can people with disabilities who, for a considerable period of be constructed in different situations (cf. Asad, 2015; time, have been using devices to ‘enhance’ their human Mol, 2012). bodies (cf. Harnacke, 2015). Social Inclusion, 2016, Volume 4, Issue 4, Pages 125–128 125 2. Approach evoked’, but also to (b) assert the human, because peo- ple with disabilities ‘seek to be recognised as human’. By addressing relations between humanity and disabil- This is in line with disability studies as dis/ability stud- ity, our themed issue will not only contribute to under- ies, that on the one hand acknowledge the struggle to standing the ways people with disabilities are and were be able with a disability and on the other hand criticize included in and excluded from the concept of humanity. the ideal of ableism and rethink ‘ideas that we might It also makes a contribution to the ongoing debates in have taken for granted’ (Goodley & Runswick-Cole, 2014, the field of disability studies about the value of a posthu- pp. 2–4). Dis/ability studies recognize the norm and seek man approach and the plea for a posthuman disabil- to trouble the norm. ity studies (Goodley, Lawthom, & Runswick-Cole, 2014; Relating our themed issue to posthumanism has also Vandekinderen & Roets, 2016). The development of the to do with our ambition to contribute from a disability multidisciplinary field disability studies since the 1970s studies perspective to research that lacks such a perspec- would be unthinkable without the social model of dis- tive. We not only want to add disability to mainstream ability. With this model, in which disability is in the first analytical categories like gender, class, and race, but also place a social construct and problem created by society, address the intersection of these categories (cf. Erevelles, activist scholars tried to replace the medical and individ- 2011). The research tradition of posthumanism enables ual model of disability. Meanwhile, the field is enriched this and allows disability studies to be part of a broader by other models and approaches (Winance, 2016). movement that develops alternatives for the often dom- Recently, Rosi Braidotti’s book The Posthuman (2013) inant ‘humanist man’ (cf. Braidotti, 2013; Butler, 2015). inspired scholars to argue for a posthuman disability This themed issue is a result of a project which was ini- studies. Goodley et al. (2014) have argued that disability tiated and managed by the foundation Disability Studies studies is ‘perfectly at ease’ with the posthuman in criti- in the Netherlands and in which we give a broader per- cizing the ideal of humanity that was ‘implicitly assumed spective by working with a mix of scholars from inside to be masculine, white, urbanized, speaking a standard and outside the field of disability studies. language, heterosexually inscribed in a reproductive unit We want our issue to enrich the ongoing debates in and a full citizen of a recognised polity’ (Braidotti, 2013, at least two ways. In the first place, our choice to inves- p. 65). They appreciate Braidotti’s aim not only to ‘desta- tigate humanity as a contested concept enables the de- bilise humanist man’, but also to look for alternatives velopment of a balanced assessment of the way this con- ‘in response to the oppressive nature of humanism’ and cept stimulates or not the inclusion of people with disabil- to rethink ‘our relationships with our environments, our ity. As has already been mentioned, we understand the world and human and non-human inhabitants of our posthuman condition as one in which we constantly re- planet’ (Goodley et al., 2014, pp. 343–345). flect on humanity, rather than as a condition beyond hu- We have no need to position ourselves as posthu- manity. Secondly, the issue is innovative in approaching man disability scholars, but we are inspired by the aim to humanity as a contested concept from a broad range of ‘destabilise humanist man’. Therefore, we investigate hu- disciplines (including cultural analysis, care ethics, health manity as a contested concept and we approach humans science, theatre studies, history) and with different, ex- as embedded in a network of relations between humans plicitly explained methods. With the reflection on human- and non-humans. Of course this approach is not reserved ity and our methods we try to take into account