More options | Back issues
Home
News
Opinion & Forums
Careers
Sponsored Information & Solutions
Campus Viewpoints
Services
The Chronicle of Higher Education: Colloquy

COLLOQUY
THE QUESTION
RESPONSES
BACKGROUND

Dr. Singer is as dangerous as anyone who would subordinate human life and the domain of moral value to the quixotic whimsy of reason. Human reason is no science. It is routinely distorted by personal passions, lust for power and personal gain, emotion, and infinite other pollutions of thought.

Dr. Singer is dangerous because of his simple-minded arrogance. Dr. Singer, a man with little knowledge of disability and the disability rights movement, walks on the beach one day and decides that it is OK to kill disabled infants. To make that private presumption is arrogant and insensitive, but to publicize it leads me to question the utility of his existence. His musings have been great for his career, but they have endangered people with disabilities. While non-disabled "philosophers" calmly defend the icy spin of reason, people with disabilities around the world are daily murdered or left to die in institutions. They are shunned, disowned, shut out, locked up, abused, used, and denied necessary medical care. The pervasive experience of oppression, marginalization, persecution, endangerment, and death cannot be dismissed by a philosopher worthy of the title.

Dr. Singer is dangerous because he trusts reason alone with other people's lives and, yes, with other people's mothers. Surely we must address issues of medical technology, prolongation of life, the sanctity of life, and individual rights. However, what fool would trust their life to the barren landscape of another person's reason? Reason is a tool, an aid. Reason helps us to define issues. Reason can construct a framework for decision making. Reason can illuminate inconsistencies. But how can reason unveil the essence of humanity? How can reason determine the value of a life? How can reason measure love? How can reason detect the spirit? It cannot.

Western philosophy over two millennia have led us to understand that we hold all thought and experience in an existential moment; a moment of complete freedom and absolute terror because we realize we know not. What explosion of knowing awaits us in this space between life and death, speech and silence, knowledge and ignorance? This is the legacy of our philosophical heritage. Philosophy is not the banal clucking of self-important hens, it is not the beeping of an academic video game, and it is not the reckless endangerment of the innocent. Philosophy is the doorway to God. Let us be more demanding of our colleagues, more responsible in our practice, and more noble in our lives.

-- Mark Polit, Parent of a child with severe disabilities (posted 3/6, 10 a.m., E.S.T.)
< previous response
next response >

JOIN THE DEBATE

> STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name:

Your title & institution:

Your phone:

Your e-mail address:

> STEP 2: Your comments

> STEP 3: Submit!

Be sure to include your name and affiliation. Legitimate requests for anonymity will be honored.

The Chronicle maintains Colloquy as an open forum where readers can comment on issues. Submissions may be condensed or edited for clarity, but editing is kept to a minimum. We correct errors in spelling, punctuation, etc. In addition, we remove statements that have the potential to be libelous or to slander someone. In cases in which people make claims that could be libelous, we will remove the names of institutions and departments. But in those cases, we will not alter the ideas contained in the submissions.

Please read our privacy policy or our Colloquy help page if you have questions.

Check this box only if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.

   


Copyright © 2000 by The Chronicle of Higher Education