The group of assumptions that underlie these questions takes for granted the "metaphysical status" and "epistemological character" of the category of disability, casting disability as a self-evident (and thus philosophically uninteresting) designation that only science and medicine can accurately represent. 

Assumptions Underlying Questions in Mainstream Philosophy 

Discussions about disability are becoming more and more mainstream in philosophy. Many of the questions surrounding disability are things like: What (if anything) does society owe to disabled people? On what grounds is it justifiable to euthanize disabled people? Is it ethical to conduct research experiments on cognitively disabled subjects? Questions like these are based on a shared set of assumptions. 


Arizona State University

In “A Naturalized Narrative,” Tremain argues that disability is not a fixed biological fact but a socially and politically produced category. She critiques how dominant narratives treat disability as “natural,” masking the ways that institutions, medical discourse, and power relations actually create and sustain it. Drawing on Foucault, Tremain shows that disability is an effect of biopower—a system that defines, regulates, and normalizes bodies in ways that uphold ableist norms.

Chapter 1 Section 1: A Naturalized Narrative 

Tremain, S. L. (2017). Foucault and feminist philosophy of disability. University of Michigan Press.

Foucault and Feminist Philosophy of Disability Reference

Disability in Mainstream Philosophy

I find it important to note that this book was published in 2017. Times change fast. What was salient 8 years ago may have changed by now. What's important is that the field continues to evolve and grow as new ways of thinking about the world emerge. 

Learn Before

Related

Learn After