Affordable Access

Publisher Website

The Concept of Harm and the Significance of Normality

Authors
Journal
Journal of Applied Philosophy
0264-3758
Publisher
Wiley Blackwell (Blackwell Publishing)
Publication Date
Volume
29
Issue
4
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5930.2012.00574.x
Keywords
  • Original Articles
Disciplines
  • Biology

Abstract

Many believe that severe intellectual impairment, blindness or dying young amount to serious harm and disadvantage. It is also increasingly denied that it matters, from a moral point of view, whether something is biologically normal to humans. We show that these two claims are in serious tension. It is hard explain how, if we do not ascribe some deep moral significance to human nature or biological normality, we could distinguish severe intellectual impairment or blindness from the vast list of seemingly innocent ways in which we fail to have as much wellbeing as we could, such not having super-intelligence, or not living to 130. We consider a range of attempts to draw this intuitive normative distinction without appealing to normality. These, we argue, all fail. But this doesn't mean that we cannot draw this distinction or that we must, implausibly, conclude that biological normality does possess an inherent moral importance. We argue that, despite appearances, it is not biological normality but rather statistical normality that, although lacking any intrinsic moral significance, nevertheless makes an important moral difference in ways that explain and largely justify the intuitive distinction.

There are no comments yet on this publication. Be the first to share your thoughts.

Statistics

Seen <100 times
0 Comments

More articles like this

The concept of normality.

on American journal of psychother... July 1952

Rorschach concepts of normality.

on Journal of consulting psycholo... August 1954

[On the concept of psychic normality].

on Schweizer Archiv für Neurolog... 1963
More articles like this..