Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

THE PROBLEM OF SPEAKING FOR OTHERS REDUX: INSISTENCE ON DISCLOSURE AND THE ETHICS OF ENGAGEMENT

THE PROBLEM OF SPEAKING FOR OTHERS REDUX: INSISTENCE ON DISCLOSURE AND THE ETHICS OF ENGAGEMENT Virtually any academic text written about disability will inevitably include some kind of statement about the author’s personal relationship to disability. Why? What kind of work do statements like that do? In my recent book, Loneliness and its Opposite: sex, disability and the ethics of engagement (2015, with Jens Rydström), I decided against such disclosure. This paper discusses the reasons for and possible consequences of my decision not to disclose, by re-examining the question of what it means to speak for an-other. I explore that question in relation to philosophers like Linda Alcoff, Iris Marion Young, and Gayatri Spivak, and disability studies scholars like Tom Shakespeare and Lennard Davis. The paper discusses these scholars’ work in relation to the limits and possibilities of academic selfknowledge, and ethical engagement. Keywords: disability; reflexivity; sexuality; crip theory; anthropology; subaltern http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Knowledge Cultures Addleton Academic Publishers

THE PROBLEM OF SPEAKING FOR OTHERS REDUX: INSISTENCE ON DISCLOSURE AND THE ETHICS OF ENGAGEMENT

DON KULICK
Knowledge Cultures , Volume 3 (6): 20 – Jan 1, 2015
Download PDF
20 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/addleton-academic-publishers/the-problem-of-speaking-for-others-redux-insistence-on-disclosure-and-40hzNrTTEn

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Addleton Academic Publishers
Copyright
© 2009 Addleton Academic Publishers
ISSN
2327-5731
eISSN
2375-6527
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Virtually any academic text written about disability will inevitably include some kind of statement about the author’s personal relationship to disability. Why? What kind of work do statements like that do? In my recent book, Loneliness and its Opposite: sex, disability and the ethics of engagement (2015, with Jens Rydström), I decided against such disclosure. This paper discusses the reasons for and possible consequences of my decision not to disclose, by re-examining the question of what it means to speak for an-other. I explore that question in relation to philosophers like Linda Alcoff, Iris Marion Young, and Gayatri Spivak, and disability studies scholars like Tom Shakespeare and Lennard Davis. The paper discusses these scholars’ work in relation to the limits and possibilities of academic selfknowledge, and ethical engagement. Keywords: disability; reflexivity; sexuality; crip theory; anthropology; subaltern

Journal

Knowledge Cultures – Addleton Academic Publishers

Published: Jan 1, 2015

There are no references for this article.