496
Views
14
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Cartesian dualism and disabled phenomenology

Pages 118-128 | Received 18 Aug 2014, Accepted 02 Dec 2014, Published online: 30 Jan 2015

References

  • Abberley, P. 1987. “The Concept of Oppression and the Development of a Social Theory of Disability.” Disability, Handicap and Society 2 (1): 5–19. doi:10.1080/02674648766780021.
  • Abrams, T. 2013a. “Being-towards-death and Taxes: Heidegger, Disability and the Ontological Difference.” Canadian Journal of Disability Studies 2 (1): 28–50. doi:10.15353/cjds.v2i1.69.
  • Abrams, T. 2013b. “Taking Tragic Measures? Disability Studies' Anti-metrology and the Government of Thalidomide.” Theoria & Praxis 1 (2): 28–42.
  • Abrams, T. 2014a. “Boon or Bust? Heidegger, Disability Aesthetics, and the Thalidomide Memorial.” Disability & Society 29 (5): 751–762. doi:10.1080/09687599.2013.848784.
  • Abrams, T. 2014b. “Re-reading Erving Goffman as an Emancipatory Researcher.” Disability Studies Quarterly 34 (1). http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3434/3525.
  • Abrams, T. 2014c. “Flawed by Dasein? Phenomenology, Ethnomethodology, and the Personal Experience of Physiotherapy.” Human Studies 37 (3): 431–446. doi:10.1007/s10746-014-9316-2.
  • Abrams, T. 2014d. “Is Everyone Upright? Erwin Straus' “The Upright Posture” and Disabled Phenomenology.” Human Affairs 24 (4): 564–573. doi:10.2478/s13374-014-0249-2.
  • Ahmed, S. 2006. Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others. Durham: Duke University Press.
  • Aho, K. A. 2005. “The Missing Dialogue between Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty: On the Importance of the Zollikon Seminars.” Body & Society 11 (2): 1–23. doi:10.1177/1357034X05052459.
  • Arendt, H. 1958. The Origins of Totalitarianism. 2nd ed. Cleaveland: World Publishing Company.
  • Arendt, H. 1971, October 21. Martin Heidegger at Eighty. New York: The New York Review of Books.
  • Arendt, H. 1998. The Human Condition. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Askay, R. R. 1999. “Heidegger, the Body and the French Philosophers.” Continental Philosophy Review 32 (1): 29–35. doi:10.1023/A:1026403028258.
  • Barnes, C. 1996. “Disability and the Myth of the Independent Researcher.” Disability & Society 11 (1): 107–112. doi:10.1080/09687599650023362.
  • Conrad, P. 1992. “Medicalization and Social Control.” Annual Review of Sociology 18 (1): 209–232. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.18.080192.001233.
  • Cott, C. A. 2004. “Client-centered Rehabilitation: Client Perspectives.” Disability and Rehabilitation 26: 1411–1422. doi:10.1080/09638280400000237.
  • Cott, C. A., G. Teare, K. S. McGilton, and S. Lineker. 2006. “Reliability and Construct Validity of the Client-centered Rehabilitation Questionnaire.” Disability and Rehabilitation 28: 1387–1397. doi:10.1080/09638280600638398.
  • Crossley, N. 1995. “Merleau-Ponty, the Elusive Body and Carnal Sociology.” Body & Society 1 (1): 43–63. doi:10.1177/1357034X95001001004.
  • Descartes, R. 2008. Meditations on First Philosophy with Selections from the Objections and Replies. Translated by M. Moriarty. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Dreyfus, H. L., and M. A. Wrathall. 2005. “Martin Heidegger: An Introduction to his Thought, Work and Life.” In A Companion to Heidegger, edited by H. L. Dreyfus and M. A. Wrathall, 1–16. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  • Goffman, E. 1983. “The Interaction Order: American Sociological Association, 1982 Presidential Address.” American Sociological Review 48 (1): 1–17. doi: 10.2307/2095141
  • Hacking, I. 2005. “The Cartesian Vision Fulfilled: Analogue Bodies and Digital Minds.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 30 (2): 153–166. doi:10.1179/030801805X25963.
  • Hacking, I. 2007. “Our Neo-Cartesian Bodies in Parts.” Critical Inquiry 34: 78–105. doi: 10.1086/526088
  • Heidegger, M. 1982. The Basic Problems of Phenomenology. Translated by A. Hofstader, Revised edition. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
  • Heidegger, M. 1992. The Concept of Time. Translated by W. McNeil. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Heidegger, M. 1993. “Letter on Humanism.” In Martin Heidegger: Basic Writings, edited by D. F. Krell. 2nd ed., 213–266. San Francisco, CA: Harper Collins.
  • Heidegger, M. 1996. Being and Time. Translated by J. Stambaugh. New York: State University of New York Press.
  • Heidegger, M. 2001. Zollikon Seminars. Translated by F. Mayr and R. Askay. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
  • Hughes, B. 1999. “The Constitution of Impairment: Modernity and the Aesthetic of Oppression.” Disability & Society 14 (2): 155–172. doi:10.1080/09687599926244.
  • Hughes, B. 2000. “Medicine and the Aesthetic Invalidation of Disabled People.” Disability & Society 15: 555–568. doi: 10.1080/09687590050058170
  • Hughes, B. 2007. “Being Disabled: Towards a Critical Social Ontology for Disability Studies.” Disability & Society 22: 673–683. doi: 10.1080/09687590701659527
  • Hughes, B., and K. Paterson. 1997. “The Social Model of Disability and the Disappearing Body: Towards a Sociology of Impairment.” Disability & Society 12: 325–340. doi:10.1080/09687599727209.
  • Husserl, E. 1970. The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology: An Introduction to Phenomenological Philosophy. Translated by D. Carr. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
  • Leder, D. 1990a. “Clinical Interpretation: The Hermeneutics of Medicine.” Theoretical Medicine 11 (1): 9–24. doi:10.1007/BF00489234.
  • Leder, D. 1990b. The Absent Body. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Merleau-Ponty, M. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception. Translated by C. Smith. New York: Routledge.
  • Merleau-Ponty, M. 1963. The Structure of Behaviour. Translated by A. L. Fisher. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquense University Press.
  • Michalko, R. 1998. The Mystery of the Eye and the Shadow of Blindness. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  • Nicholls, D. A., and B. E. Gibson. 2010. “The Body and Physiotherapy.” Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 26: 497–509. doi:10.3109/09593981003710316.
  • Oliver, M. 1990. The Politics of Disablement. London: MacMillan.
  • Oliver, M. 1992. “Changing the Social Relations of Research Production?” Disability, Handicap & Society 7 (2): 101–114. doi: 10.1080/02674649266780141
  • Oliver, M. 1998. “Theories of Disability in Health Practice and Research.” British Medical Journal 317: 1446–1449. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7170.1446
  • Oliver, M. 2004. “If I had a Hammer: The Social Model in Action.” In Disabling Barriers, Enabling Environments, edited by J. Swain, C. Barnes, S. French, and C. Thomas, 7–12. London: Sage.
  • Paterson, K. 2012. “It's about Time! Understanding the Experience of Speech Impairment.” In The Routledge Handbook of Disability Studies, edited by N. Watson, A. Roulstone, and C. Thomas, 165–177. London: Routledge.
  • Paterson, K., and B. Hughes. 1999. “Disability Studies and Phenomenology: The Carnal Politics of Everyday Life.” Disability & Society 14: 597–610. doi:10.1080/09687599925966.
  • Sandström, M., and L. Lundin-Olsson. 2007. “Development and Evaluation of a New Questionnaire for Rating Perceived Participation.” Clinical Rehabilitation 21: 833–835. doi: 10.1177/0269215507077278
  • Shakespeare, T. 2012. “Still a Health Issue.” Disability and Health Journal 5 (3): 129–131. doi:10.1016/j.dhjo.2012.04.002.
  • Siebers, T. 2007. “Disability and the Right to Have Rights.” Disability Studies Quarterly 27 (1/2). http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/13/13.
  • Siebers, T. 2010. Disability Aesthetics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  • Titchkosky, T. 2003. “Governing Embodiment: Technologies of Constituting Citizens with Disabilities.” Canadian Journal of Sociology 28: 517–542. doi:10.2307/3341840.
  • Titchkosky, T. 2007. Reading and Writing Disability Differently: The Textured Life of Embodiment. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  • Titchkosky, T. 2011. The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  • Titchkosky, T., and R. Michalko. 2012. “The Body as the Problem of Individuality: A Phenomenological Disability Studies Approach.” In Disability and Social Theory: New Directions and Developments, edited by D. Goodley, B. Hughes, and L. Davis, 127–142. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Toombs, S. K. 1995. “The Lived Experience of Disability.” Human Studies 18 (1): 9–23. doi:10.1007/BF01322837.
  • Turner, B. S. 1984. The Body and Society: Explorations in Social Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Turner, B. S. 2001. “Disability and the Sociology of the Body.” In Handbook of Disability Studies, edited by G. Albrecht, K. Seelman, and M. Bury, 252–266. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Wade, D. 2006. “Why Physical Medicine, Physical Disability, and Physical Rehabilitation: We should Abandon Cartesian Dualism.” Clinical Rehabilitation 20 (3): 185–190. doi:10.1191/0269215506cr952ed.
  • Wendell, S. 1989. “Toward a Feminist Theory of Disability.” Hypatia 4 (2): 104–124. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.1989.tb00576.x.
  • Wilson, A. 2012. The Dys-appearing Body: Understanding the Lived Experience of Women with Fibromyalgia. Ottawa: Carleton University.
  • Wittgenstein, L. 2001. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Zola, I. K. 1989. “Towards the Necessary Universalizing of a Disability Policy.” The Milbank Quarterly 67: 401–428. doi:10.2307/3350151.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.