Disability, Subject‐Dependence, and the Bad‐Difference View

Philosophers have debated on the "mere-difference" view of disability, according to which disability as such is neutral in terms of well-being, just like race and gender. It is contrasted with the "bad-difference" view, which holds that disability is bad for its possessor even in a non-ableist situation. We first illustrate how neither view can be sensitive to the diversity of disabled people and their disabilities. Subsequently, we propose an alternative outlook-the conditional bad-difference view of disability: a disability is bad for its possessor if and only if it hampers her aspired way of life, even without ableism. In addition to being theoretically moderate and thus more plausible than the existing outlooks, this view also offers a robust ethical case for policies and practices catering to the varying needs and values of disabled people, such as personalized healthcare and the user-led research of assistive technologies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Bioethics
Published
2025-07-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.70012
Primary Topic
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Disability, Subject‐Dependence, and the Bad‐Difference View

Shu Ishida, Mitsuru Sasaki‐Honda, Tsutomu Sawai
Bioethics
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
article

Disability, Subject‐Dependence, and the Bad‐Difference View

Shu Ishida, Mitsuru Sasaki‐Honda, Tsutomu Sawai
article en

Abstract

Philosophers have debated on the "mere-difference" view of disability, according to which disability as such is neutral in terms of well-being, just like race and gender. It is contrasted with the "bad-difference" view, which holds that disability is bad for its possessor even in a non-ableist situation. We first illustrate how neither view can be sensitive to the diversity of disabled people and their disabilities. Subsequently, we propose an alternative outlook-the conditional bad-difference view of disability: a disability is bad for its possessor if and only if it hampers her aspired way of life, even without ableism. In addition to being theoretically moderate and thus more plausible than the existing outlooks, this view also offers a robust ethical case for policies and practices catering to the varying needs and values of disabled people, such as personalized healthcare and the user-led research of assistive technologies.

BioethicsVol. 39(9)
Hiroshima University (JP), Universidad de Cantabria (ES), National University of Singapore (SG), Hiroshima University of Economics (JP), Kyoto University (JP), Instituto de Biomedicina y Biotecnología de Cantabria (ES)
Uehiro Foundation on Ethics and Education, Hitachi Global Foundation, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Disability, Subject‐Dependence, and the Bad‐Difference View — Shu Ishida, Mitsuru Sasaki‐Honda, et al. · Bioethics (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS