This long article from The New York Times Magazine is about the confrontation/dialogue between Peter Singer (extreme utilitarian philosopher) and a disabled rights activists. Personally, I think both hold unreasonable extremist positions-Singer’s utilitarianism does not take into account human feeling and frailties, and ironically, nether do disabled right’s activists-who deny that there might be a case to be made that there is a qualitative difference of life between the abled and disabled. More comments later-but I am surprised that the article did not bring up Rawls’ “Original Position,” ie; what society would be just if you lived behind a veil of ignorance, not knowing your own status or abilities?
Comments are closed.