researchmap

Authorship：Lead author   Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

DOI： 10.69269/hokkaidosyakaifukusi.45.0_26

researchmap

Authorship：Lead author   Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Doctoral thesis  

researchmap

Authorship：Lead author   Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Japanese Society for the Study of Social Welfare (JSSSW)  

The question “What is a disability?” cannot be answered unambiguously. Based on this premise, this study considers the possibility of a “strategic and practical use of the definition of disability,” in which each case selects multiple definitions of disability according to their purpose, even contradictory, from the perspective of “usefulness” in the sense that they serve to reduce or eliminate the suffering and pain of disabled people. This paper, therefore, aims to discuss the potential of this “strategic and practical use of disability definitions,” responding to various criticisms that might be expected. We then suggest that the “strategic and practical use of disability definitions” has significant advantages in achieving these goals, as they vary from case to case.

DOI： 10.24469/jssw.63.2_14

researchmap

Authorship：Lead author   Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Japanese Society for the Study of Social Welfare (JSSSW)  

Several researchers in the field of disability studies have been involved in defining disability (impairment), and conflicts have also arisen in this process;the conflict between post-structuralists and interactionists is one such conflict. This study thus argues that such conflicts are meaningless if they are made from the perspective of “truth” through a discussion of Quine’s “holism” and Rorty’s conception of “truth” and determines the factors giving rise to such conflicts. Consequently, it was observed that the question of what disability (impairment) is cannot be answered in a single sense, and that if the question of what disability (impairment) is posed from the perspective of “truth,” then the conflict over the question is meaningless. Based on these results, a new avenue of strategic and practical use of various definitions of disability was proposed.

DOI： 10.24469/jssw.62.2_29

CiNii Article

researchmap

Other Link： https://search.jamas.or.jp/link/ui/2022049930

Authorship：Lead author   Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

CiNii Article

researchmap

Total pages：422p   Language：Japanese

CiNii Books

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Language：Japanese   Presentation type：Oral presentation (general)  

researchmap