Skip to main content
Log in

Abstract

This article is the result of a mutual interest in the radical philosophical dialogue discussed by Martin Buber. The radical dialogue is rooted in western European values of humanism, values that are challenged because they exclude women, people with disabilities, non-western, indigenous people and sexual minorities. With our basis in radical dialogue we are discussing flaws within the very concept of dialogue, how dialogue is challenged in encounters between people with severe disabilities and their helpers, and we are proposing a new interpretation of dialogue in a posthuman area. To illuminate what might be at stake in relations where power is clearly imbalanced we use Pierre Bourdieus theory of the gift when asking ourselves: “How can we understand dialogue when there apparently is one dominant giver and one receiver unable to return the gift?” Discussing this question, we draw on Rosi Braidotti and her Posthuman Critical Theory to see if we can find new grounds to build dialogue on.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bakhtin, M.M. 1984. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, C., and G. Mercer. 2010. Exploring Disability, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, C.W., and A.M. Sidorkin (eds.). 2004. No Education Without Relation, vol. 259. Bern: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. 1998. Practical Reason. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braidotti, R. 2013. The Posthuman. London: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braidotti, R. 2016. Posthuman Critical Theory. In Critical Posthumanism and Planetary Futures, eds. Debashish Banerji, Makarand R. Paranjape. Springer Link ISBN:978-81-322-3635-1 (Print) 978-81-322-3637-5 (Online).

  • Buber, M. 1958. I and Thou. New York: Collier Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buber, M. 1988. The Knowledge of Man: Selected Essays. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burbules, N.C. 1993. Dialogue in Teaching: Theory and Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desmarais, J. 2001. Preferring Not To: The Paradox of Passive Resistance in Herman Melville’s “Bartleby”. Journal of the Short Story in English 36: 25–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodley, D., R. Lawthorn and C.K. Runswick. 2014. Posthuman disability studies. Subjectivity, 7: 342–361 ISSN:1755-6341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandin, Temple Downloaded 14th February 2018. http://www.templegrandin.com/.

  • Herbrecchter, S. 2013. The Roar on the Other Side of Silence…or, What’s Left of the Humanities? Cultural Machine. Reviews April 2013 http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/viewFile/495/516.

  • Matusov, E. 2009. Journey Into Dialogic Pedagogy. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melville, H. 1853. Bartleby the Scrivener: A Story of Wall Street. New York: Melville House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noddings, N. 2013. Caring: A Relational Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapley, M. 2004. The Social Construction of Intellectual Disability. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sahlins, M.D. 1972. Stone Age Economics. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saur, Ellen. 2008. Kulturarena med mulighet for dialog? Grottaen fritidsklubb for mennesker med utviklingshemming. Ph.d. Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).

  • Serres, M. 2016. The Five Senses. A Philosophy of Mingled Bodies. London: Bloomsbury Revelations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, T.W. 2006. Disability Rights and Wrongs. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidorkin, A. 1999. In Aune, K. & Saur, E. Dialogiske perspektiver. Når vi er forskjellige. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

  • Sidorkin, A. M. 1999. Beyond Discourse: Education, The Self and Dialogue. Buffalo, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, S. 2011. Dialogue and Its Discontents: The Cognitive and Hermeneutic Forms of Dialogue. Philosophy of Education Archive 190–198.

  • US Holocaust Museum. 2018. Euthanasia Killings https://www.ushmm.org/learn/students/learning-materials-and-resources/mentally-and-physically-handicapped-victims-of-the-nazi-era/euthanasia-killings.

  • World Health Organization. 2002. Towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young-Bruehl, E. 1998. The Anatomy of Prejudices. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ellen Saur.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saur, E., Sidorkin, A.M. Disability, Dialogue, and the Posthuman. Stud Philos Educ 37, 567–578 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-018-9616-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-018-9616-5

Keywords

Navigation