Vulnerability Is Good

Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Law book series (BRIEFSLAW)

Abstract

This final chapter will argue that the common perception that vulnerability is an undesirable and stigmatic characteristic is misguided. Rather we should rejoice in our universal vulnerability. It requires us to reach out to others and work together to find mutual solutions to our common challenges. Our vulnerability means we must be open to change and rethinking who we are. It means we find our identity and meaning through and with others, rather than in our own abilities.

Keywords

Vulnerability Relationships Personhood Co-operation Virtue Goods 

References

  1. Archard D (2001) Philosophical perspectives on childhood. In: Fiona J (ed) Legal concepts of childhood. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Butler J (2004) Precarious life. Verso, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Card C (1998) Stoicism, evil and the possibility of morality. Metaphilosophy 29:245–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carse A (2006) Vulnerability, agency and human flourishing. In: Dell’Oro R (ed) Taylor C. Health and Human Flourishing Georgetown University Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  5. Drichel S (2013) Reframing vulnerability: “So Obviously the Problem…?”Subst 42:3–25Google Scholar
  6. Dodds S (2005) Gender, ageing, and injustice: social and political contexts of bioethics. J Med Ethics 31:295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fine M, Glendinning C (2005) Dependence, independence or interdependence? Revisiting the concepts of ‘care’ and ‘dependency. Ageing Soc 21:601–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fineman N (2010) The vulnerable subject and the responsive state. Emory Law J 60:251–298Google Scholar
  9. Fineman M (2012) “Elderly” as vulnearble: rethinking the nature of indivdviual and societal responsibility. Elder Law Rev 17:23–65Google Scholar
  10. Foster C, Herring J (2017) Identity. Personhood and the Law, Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilson E (2013) The ethics of vulnerability: a feminist analysis of social life and practice. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Harris G (1997) Dignity and vulnerability. California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  13. Kittay EF (2011) The ethics of care, dependence, and disability. Ratio Juris 44–49Google Scholar
  14. Nussbaum M (2001) The fragility of goodness: luck and ethics in Greek tragedy and philosophy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Phillips A (2011) Freud’s helplessness. In: Levine G (ed) The joy of secularism. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJGoogle Scholar
  16. Pleschberge S (2007) Dignity and the challenge of dying in nursing homes: the residents’ view. Age Ageing 36:197–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sevenhuijsen S (1998) Citizenship and the ethics of care. Routledge, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shakespeare T (2000) Help. Verso, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Shildrick M (2002) Embodying the monster: encounters with the vulnerable self. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Law, Exeter CollegeUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations