"All kinds of attributes make one less able. Illiteracy and poverty are disabilities, and so are stupidity, obesity, and boringness. Extreme age and extreme youth are both disabilities. Faith is a disability insofar as it constrains you from self-interest; atheism is a disability inasmuch as it shields you from hope. One might see power as a disability, too, for the isolation in which it imprisons those who wield it. ... We are all differently abled from one another, and context--which is socially constructed--often decides what will be protected and indulged" (p. 33).
This quote stirs up questions such as: What sorts of disabilities, given the socially constructed contexts, should be protected, indulged, or simply dealt with on an individual basis? It makes me wonder if this is the root of the "special snowflake" debate between generations in this modern era. Some of the attributes Solomon lists here are ones that are brought up in defense of an inability to act a certain way or deal with a certain situation, not to mention that the arguments of today are often supported by mental illness, as well. I wonder if those arguments that are deemed "too soft" or "too weak" by opposing generations are decided as such because the attribute could be dealt with individually, or because of a lack of understanding that the socially constructed context has shifted with time, and the aforementioned attribute should be looked at more as a disability for that particular place and time.
If there was one clear takeaway from Solomon's book, it is that we need only to listen to each other's stories to better understand their position in life.
#challenge #professionaldevelopment #reading #bookreview #millenials #babyboomers #genZ #generationZ #specialsnowflake #debate #identity #disability
Solomon, A. (2012). Far from the Tree: Parents, Children and the Search for Identity. New York: Scribner Classics.
Σχόλια