Yesterday I had a Philosophy of Mind tutorial, on Cartesian Dualism. This blog has a slight personal touch to it, as you will soon see. Most of us hadn't done the reading but the conversation nevertheless kicked off philosophically on whether we can have self-consciousness.
First we argued on the basis of animals, and I brought up a story of my own showing that animals do not have self-consciousness because their natural instincts are supreme - those of you who might know think of my first dog mickie and the car accident, where he went to die but when he was rescued to be treated, he bit the person that picked him up. This as I see it, as proof.
One person in the class, whether he disagrees personally or not is up to debate, but he used the analogy of disabled people to question, ponder the possibility whether disabled people (he didn't specify so naturally I take this in most general terms) like animals, whether they are capable of self-consciousness. In his defence, I understood what he really meant but there is an element of ignorance on his part where he failed to specify what he means. People will, mainly take things as given and this is an implication that is ludicrous and evidence to show that clarity of expression is paramount. Never mind the fact that philosophically speaking he was arguing for the sake of arguing. There is a fine line between thought and intent. Had I not known any better I'd have cried fowl. But this is not a minority crying wolf, even though I think it such a thing said in print SCOPE would have a field day. Look no further than Jeremy Clarkson's recent comments to see what I mean here.
For arguments sake it should always be said that when making a point there is no intent to offend. Otherwise people simply will, whether offence was intended or not.
On the topic, I would suggest that even the very definition of what a self-consciousness is. It would appear from the philosophical quagmire of yesterday this is unclear among students.
I know full well what I am and I know, also believe that the very notion of CP on a piece of paper or mind can illicit the most stereotypical of responses. I am not your average, conventional, stereotypical Cereal Palsean. But the very notion that any persons being any different is an affront to any idea of equality of persons in the basic sense, any idea of fairness among persons. It smacks of pure ignorance.
For anyone who doubts my position, I would invite you to read the US Declaration of Independence, the Social Contract ethic that is the foundation of social morality today :
"All men [peoples] are created equal"* (Thomas Jefferson)
*NB: The use of language is understandably gendered, cultured to the time. It is now universally understood that 'men' in this context is to extend to all humankind. Think of the iconic Star Trek opening credit declaration as an example - From 'no man' (TOS) to 'no one' (TNG).
This is unequivocally a truism. Black, White, Gay, Straight, Transexual, Hermaphrodites, Disabled and non-disabled, everyone, we are all equal. And not just in the eyes of God, but in the depths of our soul and understanding of humanity. Any advocate of inequality of this scale is contradicting themselves - it would always be possible then for them to be the supressed, the weak, and not the opressors and the strong.
A final note to finish on with the general bracketing of disabilities. The response I've given, I argue to quote Brian Barry, is the only intellectually honest one. Second, PVS or not (which I believe is what he really meant to refer to), using disability in a general context equates not just Cerebral Palay to Persistant Vegetative State, but obesity and even left-handedness which can be considered amongst those as disabilities. It is also debated whether those with PVS are without a self-conscious if this is the argument to make and it is known I am assured that people can come out of PVS.
There are degrees to disabilities, stereotypes and brackets are undeserved and ignorant.
And to say that people with disabilities, or anyone with anything beyond average, as not having a self-conscious - which is centre to self-realisation and being? Heaven forbid.
-- Post From My iPhone
Posts
