I think there's a lot of truth to what you say but there are exceptions. The deaf community, for example, is very much an identity. They have not only their own community but their own distinct language, and necessarily so because of the nature of the disability. They are certainly disadvantaged in society but they are generally proud of…
I think there's a lot of truth to what you say but there are exceptions. The deaf community, for example, is very much an identity. They have not only their own community but their own distinct language, and necessarily so because of the nature of the disability. They are certainly disadvantaged in society but they are generally proud of their community and even occasionally look down on those who are not members of their group. (I have no direct experience with the deaf community, only second-hand readings, so I welcome comments from anyone who does.) It's a very different phenomenon from mental disabilities like bipolar or ADHD, and from physical handicaps.
Yes, it's different from other physical handicaps because they've developed not only real communities but their own culture.
It reminds me of the dynamics of languages/dialects. It really would be great, in a lot of ways, were everyone in the world to speak a common language. But it's also true that the loss of that cognitive and cultural diversity would be incredibly sad. I think Freddie would agree that sometimes – often even – there's just no escaping sad tradeoffs.
I mentioned this elsewhere but think it’s worth repeating.
If it is agreeable that the function of linguistic semiotics can lead to the production of culture, I think it is reasonable to make a distinction between the phenomenon of a unique sign language and culture developed in isolation, and the inherent disability present in the condition of being deaf.
I think the fixation on cultural identification as a replacement for social alienation, with the byproduct of self-aggrandizing narcissism, is where things go off the rails.
I think there's a lot of truth to what you say but there are exceptions. The deaf community, for example, is very much an identity. They have not only their own community but their own distinct language, and necessarily so because of the nature of the disability. They are certainly disadvantaged in society but they are generally proud of their community and even occasionally look down on those who are not members of their group. (I have no direct experience with the deaf community, only second-hand readings, so I welcome comments from anyone who does.) It's a very different phenomenon from mental disabilities like bipolar or ADHD, and from physical handicaps.
Yes, it's different from other physical handicaps because they've developed not only real communities but their own culture.
It reminds me of the dynamics of languages/dialects. It really would be great, in a lot of ways, were everyone in the world to speak a common language. But it's also true that the loss of that cognitive and cultural diversity would be incredibly sad. I think Freddie would agree that sometimes – often even – there's just no escaping sad tradeoffs.
I mentioned this elsewhere but think it’s worth repeating.
If it is agreeable that the function of linguistic semiotics can lead to the production of culture, I think it is reasonable to make a distinction between the phenomenon of a unique sign language and culture developed in isolation, and the inherent disability present in the condition of being deaf.
I think the fixation on cultural identification as a replacement for social alienation, with the byproduct of self-aggrandizing narcissism, is where things go off the rails.