Naming Vulnerability: A Diaconal Dilemma of Designation
Naming is a way of exercising power. The practice of designation in diaconia causes dilemmas. As a contribution to the self-critical examination of language use in diaconal studies and work, this article discusses the ever more common practice of designating some particular groups as “(the) vulnerab...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Publié: |
2020
|
| Dans: |
Diaconia
Année: 2020, Volume: 11, Numéro: 2, Pages: 125-140 |
| RelBib Classification: | NCC Éthique sociale RK Diaconie VA Philosophie |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Résumé: | Naming is a way of exercising power. The practice of designation in diaconia causes dilemmas. As a contribution to the self-critical examination of language use in diaconal studies and work, this article discusses the ever more common practice of designating some particular groups as “(the) vulnerable.” Such a designation may appeal to ethical and diaconal action, but it may also contribute to stigmatization and paternalism - and undermine the potential of solidarity and resistance inherent in focusing on the common condition of vulnerability. In its discussion of this dilemma, the article argues that diaconal practice should make shared vulnerability its normative basis and accordingly avoid the general designation of “(the) vulnerable groups.” Rather, it should apply alternative linguistic strategies. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2196-9027 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Diaconia
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.13109/diac.2020.11.2.125 |
