One Step Forward and One Back in the Study of Disability Below, I discuss and briefly analyze and respond to two chapters from Dan Goodly's Disability Studies: An Inter-disciplinary Approach. While it is certainly interesting and thought-provoking, I will argue that this text is flawed in ways that could have been easily avoided. In its cherry-picking of evidence and demonization of opposing viewpoints, it is one step forward and one step back for the field. Chapter 4 of Disability Studies is devoted to characterizing and ranking the varieties of sociological disability studies. It first identifies the dichotomies of subjectivity and objectivity and conflict and consensus, charting the interplay of the former pair with the concepts of...The end:
.....tance, the fact that in both Christianity and Islam the human soul is irreducibly individual and will be so judged by God at the end of time, not merely as a member of a group. It is all too easy to imagine how this chapter might be handled by ideological opponents of the author, who would no doubt have their own set of tags to attach to the arguments here in lieu of reasoned discussion ("Marxist professors!" and so on). It is odd to find people who are perfectly capable of a correct and cogent analysis of a piece of commercial advertising adopting some of the very same techniques when their topic is one that they viscerally dislike. Works Cited Goodly, Dan. Disability Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach. London: SAGE Publications, 2011.