Struck Dumb
Over at Medieval Cripples, Crazies and Imbeciles Pope Bonkface VIII (call him by his name) posted about a memorial plaque to a “dumb” astronomer which highlights the potential absurdities when “dumb” can mean unable to speak or just stupid. This made me realise that disability is yet another thing that intersects with my work on animals. In early-modern England (and presumably in other pre-modern cultures too) speech and reason were supposed to go together, and were supposed to set humans apart from animals. Therefore it might not be a coincidence that “dumb” has those two meanings: in early-modern culture they were very closely related. People who couldn’t speak might not just be seen as stupid, they could potentially have been seen as not entirely human. So Bruce Boehrer’s concept of relative anthropocentrism could apply to disability as well as race, gender, age, class etc.
Comment by ilegirl — 6:32 am, 24 May 2008 [permanent link to this comment]
How funny: Pope Bunkface! :)
What an interesting thought about the possibility that people disabled in the area of speech were perceived as less than human. The legendary pathos of the village idiot springs to mind here: the image of a being that is helpless without the charity of others, like a stray animal. This is yet another reason for my ticklist of why it is better to be alive in this century and view the lessons of history from a safe perch.
Comment by Gavin Robinson — 12:40 pm, 24 May 2008 [permanent link to this comment]
The weird thing is that pre-modern thought tended to be rational, it just started from some dubious premises and therefore reached what now look like really bizarre conclusions, even though they seemed to make perfect sense at the time.
It’s seems to be quite usual for humans in all periods to treat various kinds of out-groups as less than human. It’s not necessarily limited to human culture either. There’s some evidence that chimps can treat out-groups more like a different species.
Comment by ilegirl — 12:44 am, 25 May 2008 [permanent link to this comment]
Indeed, we still have much to learn as a species about the treatment of different others.
So, your statement about pre-modern thought being rational but based on dubious premises really made me think - thanks. Though we probably like to view our age as a sort of Reason Renaissance, it is likely that there are significant biases in the foundation of our reasoning - call them flaws, perhaps.