Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This dissertation examines how political theory can better account for and include persons with intellectual disabilities (PWID) in conceptualizations of democratic politics. Through analysis of major democratic theories, I challenge traditional assumptions about political participation that have historically excluded PWID from meaningful engagement in political life.I begin by analyzing classical liberal notions of autonomy that presume rational independence and self-sufficiency as prerequisites for political participation. Drawing on feminist scholarship and disability studies, I propose a relational understanding of autonomy that acknowledges human interdependence and a range of human capacities. However, I argue that articulating autonomy as relational is necessary but insufficient for accounting for the political expressions of PWID. I then examine the common forms of political participation, advocacy and voting. While traditional modes of engagement should be made more accessible, I suggest they too are limited. I thus turn to theories of deliberative democracy as a potentially more inclusive framework, given its ‘all affected principle’ aligns with disability advocacy. I propose a more expansive account of deliberative politics that enables collaborative and non-verbal participation, but I again argue this too remains insufficient as it remains tied to ideals of rational capacity. Finally, I propose an account of the “politics of acknowledgment.” I see this as a framework for thinking about transformative political action that need not rest on rational capacity. I articulate four key components of acknowledgment: openness to possibility, collective freedom-oriented action, commitment to the possibility of transformation, and affective receptivity. This framework creates space for recognizing political engagement occurring outside traditional channels, particularly in communities built by and for disabled people. I conclude that no single democratic theory can fully address the exclusion of PWID from political life. What is needed is a multifaceted approach that recognizes human interdependence as fundamental to political community and the possibility that arises from relationships that are typically ignored. By acknowledging disability as a universal human experience, and including it from the beginning in political theorizing, I argue that more inclusive political theories and practices can benefit all members of society, while advancing more just and representative understandings of human political life.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».