Mindful Subjects: Classification and Cognitive Disability
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MINDFUL SUBJECTS: CLASSIFICATION AND COGNITIVE DISABILITY Angela Licia Carlson A Thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Ph.D. Graduate Department of Philosophy University of Toronto O Copyright by Angela Licia Carlson 1998 National Library Bibliothèque nationale 191 of,,, du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant a la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microfom, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la fome de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. MINDFUL SUBJECTS: CLASSIFICATION AND COGNITIVE DISABILITY Ph.D. 1998 Angela Licia Carlson Philosophy Department, University of Toronto This dissertation is a cal1 for a philosophical reorientation regarding a particular classification of human beings: mental retardation. Generally, individuals with mental retardation are only discussed in philosophy as moral problems to be solved: are they persons? do they have rights? how ought they be treated? 1 depart from the traditional approach, and ask a different set of questions about the nature of classification, the effects it has on classified subjects, and the power relations involved in the process of classiQing. This project operates at three theoretical levels: it is at once a philosophical study of classification, an alternative history of mental retardation, and a discussion about the modes and effects of power. In the second and third chapters, 1 analyze the development of mental retardation as an object of knowledge, and outline a theoretical framework from which to discuss classification general!~.A feminist re-examination of this history exposes the power dynamics involved in definitions and practices associated with mental retardation. In identiQing five roles that women piayed in this history, it becomes evident that the development of this classification was inextricably bound with social and political factors, and involved multiple layea of oppression. In th: final chapter, I present a critique of philosophical discourse about cognitive disability. The preceding historical analysis serves as an important backdrop to understand current discussions about the "mental [y retarded", and reveals that many philosophers neither address this history, nor have they escaped it In applying the analytic approach to classification and power relations developed in earlier chapten, it becomes apparent that many moral philosophers do not address the socially and historically determined nature of mental retardation as a classification. Rather, they assume a medical mode1 which views it as an unproblematic "natural kind. After addressing the problem of philosophical language and definitions, I tum to one argument in particular: the case against speciesism. I argue that the treatment of persons with cognitive disabilities in arguments conceming the rnora 1 status of animals relies upon a kind of discrimination I cal1 "cognitive ableism". 1 conclude by exploring future directions for philosophical work on cognitive disabilities. 1 would like to thank my supervisor, [an Hacking, for the challenging and illurninating conversations which allowed this project to take shape, and for his endless support and encouragement. I thank Kathryn Morgan, my advisor, for her valuable input and her shared enthusiasm for the subject I have chosen. 1 am also grateful for the Connaught Fellowships and the Ontario Graduate Scholanhip that gave me the opportunity and time to complete my work. To my devoted friends and dearest family, 1 thank you for your inspiration, your patience, and the many words and silences which have sustained me. Finally, it is to the persons who are both present and absent in these pages, and whose lives have directly and indirectly touched my own, that 1 offer my deepest gratitude and respect. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION The Status of Mental Retardation.......... ,... ............................................. 2 The Historical World of Mental Retardation.................................................. 9 . ( 1) Oppositional Analysis........................~.~~.~~.................................... 10 .. (2) Feminist Analysis.......................................................................... 12 The Problem of Power..................................................................................... 13 CHAPTER TWO: MENTAL RETARDATION AS AN OBJECT OF KNOWLEDGE ............................................................................................................ 17 Institutional Discourse: Preliminary Remarks................................................. 30 The Institutional World of Mental Retardation: An Analysis of Three Tensions....................................................................... 22 ( 1) Qualitative and Quantitative Difference......................................... 25 (2) OrganicNon-Organic " Idiocy" ....................................................... 31 (3) Static and Dynamic Definitions..................................................... 34 (4) Treatment and the Static/Dynamic Opposition............................. 41 Docile Bodies, Docile Minds ...............,..... ..., ............................................. 49 .... Visibility and Invisibility: The IQ Test .......................................................... 51 .... (1) Social Visibility........................................................................... 52 (2) Individual Visibility ....................................................................... 53 3 . .... (3) Etiological Visibility...................................................................... 56 CHAPTER THREE: PHILOSOPHICAL FEATURES OF CLASSIFICATION: AN ANALYTIC iNTERLUDE .............................................. 59 Heterogeneity ................................................................................................... 59 Prototype Effects............ .. ........................................................................... 65 CHAPTER FOUR: MENTAL RETARDATION AS A GENDERED CLASSIFICATION.........................~....................................... 69 Social Groups and Modes of Power ............................................................... 71 Five Groups of Women: (1) "Feeblerninded" Women: A Prototype Effect........................................... 75 (2) Institutional Caregivers: The Paradox of Inmate Labor .............................. 83 (3) Women As Mothers: The Role of Etiology........... .. ............................. 91 (4) Female Researchers: Pedigree Studies as Woman's Work .......................... 98 (5) Female Refomists: Lady Bountiful and the "Dawn of Womanhood" ............................................................................................. 101 Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 108 CHAPTER FIVE: THE PHILOSOPHICAL WORLD OF MENTAL RETARDATION........................................................................ 111 The Language of Moral Philosophy: "Idiocy" Revisited.................................. 113 . The ProbIem of Definitron ................................................................................ 120 ( 1) Extemal Heterogeneity : The Excuse for Slim Definitions....................................................... 121 (2) Reification ........................................... .... ................................. 135 3 (3) Prototype Effects............................................................................. 131 Distinctness of Kind: Our Philosophical Pets ............... .... ........................ 134 . ( 1 ) Qualitatrve Difference...................................................................... 136 (2) Animais and the "Mentally Retarded": Analogous or Identical?.................................................................... 138 (3) The Case Against Speciesism: Peter Singer's Animal Liberu~iorz...... 141 i . How the "Cognitively Disabled Help Prove the Case ........... 142 ii . Why Choose the "Severely Cognitively Disabled?............... 146 (4) Cognitive Ableism vs . Speciesism: A Necessary Choice? ................ 155 CONCL USION ..................~........................................................................................... 167 Bioethics and the Politics of Prevention .......................................................... 172 .... Genetic Visibility and Prenatal Prototypes ........................................................ 174 Sel f-Advocacy and Reverse-Discourse ....... ................................................... 179 REFERENCES............. CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION "Mental retardation.. .is a serious condition, one that any reasonable person would rather not have.