|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
The Collage of St. Mark & St. John YCWM02 To what extent is there a stigma or label attached to the notion of disabled people and how they are perceived in society? Barrie Briggs 18/11/03 Word count: 3287 Are we socialized to believe that everyone has there place within society as equal or as divided? How do we perceive? Does it depend on the persons individual’s morals and principles ingrained or learnt behavioural patterns? It is necessary to discuss relevant theories surrounding the notion of the social model and Marxist theory in order to gain a wider understanding of how certain members of society operate and think. Does being different make humans unique or does it makes them be perceived as ‘alien’ or ‘other’? There are many important factors to consider which are quite complex but must be addressed, such as social, cultural and political theory. Are disabled people oppressed and discriminated against, with particular reference to dyslexia? Is these a stigma or labelling attached to the ways in which they are or should be treated? When relating to the notion of ‘norm’, it is essential to look at what is considered to be the ‘norm’. Is it a utopia idea or dystopian state of existence? It is also vital to include the theories surrounding equality in order to present an overview of the theory in a wider general sense. I will now explain these related issues. *** “All social systems and reproduction circuits involve asymmetrical distributions of resources and therefore all systems and circuits exhibit some degree of political inequality”. (A. Giddens, 1989) There is always going to be, to some extent, a hierarchical division between certain classes surrounding us in today’s society, i.e. a differentiation between status, conflict of gender and ethnicity, to mention a few. One important area to focus on is the concept of disability and disable people and there position within our culture today. This will be elaborated to a further extent later in my research. Firstly, it is necessary to establish a broader understanding of social theory in order to find the origin or route of the issue, (and to some a problem), of division within certain structural classes. According to Portor (1987), these ideologies and topics of discussion were existent as far back as the eighteen century, and there were two predominant ideologies which were understood and accepted on a universal scale or level even at that time. They were known as the concepts of ‘reason’ and ‘science’, where as, the term ‘madness’ which could also be look upon as the ‘other’. People who were considered mad were looked upon as being confined and marginalised within their cultural surroundings and existing environment. To many, the term ‘reason’ could be viewed as something logical and similarly, science can be perceived as something which is proven. At that time in history ‘so called’ ‘mad’ people gathered a stigma in the sense that they were to be pitied rather than to be viewed upon as dangerous. This presented a problem in the sense that human beings, to some extent, began to hold back and felt somewhat resilient with regards to understanding differences in people that surrounded them, due to the stereotyped nature attached to the terms ‘dangerous’ and ‘pitiful’. “The characterisation of disabled people as ‘pitiable’ , ‘pathetic’ , ’invalid’ helpless dependent has been evident.” (Hevey 1993) The term ‘madness’ at that time, could be portrayed as a form of chaos that must be contained, in other words it could be portrayed as shameful and hidden. This introduced a parallel divide in the contrast between proven logic and the uncertainty and fear of the unknown, i.e. ‘madness’, ‘difference’ or the ‘other’. “... an unconscious tendency underlying religion and scientific as well as political thought: the tendency at a given time to make facts amenable to ideas, and ideas to facts, in order to create a world image convincing enough to support the collective and individual sense of identity.” (Erikson, 1958) From looking at the writing of Erikson, 1958, it is quite apparent that people or at least certain sections of humanity find it easier to ‘follow’ or to ‘fit in’ rather than to digest information and to think for them selves. It is also easier to remain within a dominant culture whereby there is a collective thought process. He also writes about the unconscious tendency underlying religion, scientific and political thought processes. He connects this to the notion that there is a blurred vision or interpretation between ‘ideas’ and ‘facts’ which, as a result creates a convincing image of the world and in the process paradoxically initiating as sense of individual identity. Karl Marx discusses some relevant theories surrounding the lack of values within ideas themselves. “To the consistent Marxist, ideas have no value in themselves: they, like all art, are worth while only as a means to achieve equality on condition and economic satisfaction”(Swingewood 1977) Too many ideas could be understood to mean ideology and fact which reflects on knowledge. Some may argue that this disables us from thinking for ourselves therefore creating some form of paradox. “What is its nature? Is it simply psychological, causing man's subjectivity and his structure of urges to bias his acts of cognition? Or is the relation of thought to being so prejudiced by the way thought is constituted that the latter is capable only of ideologies, but mistakes them for knowledge?” (Barth 1958) Barth (1958) makes some relevant points regarding a prejudiced society.
Approximate Word count = 3561
Approximate Pages = 14.2
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|