Abstract

In this dissertation, I examine the theories of four influential non-utilitarian liberals order to demonstrate that none of them promotes social justice for disabled people. I argue that each of these theorists misconstrues the disadvantages that disabled people confront because they each assume conceptions of disablement that are inadequate to account for its phenomena. I also introduce the way in which philosophers should reconceptualize disablement. To reconceptualize disablement in this way, philosophers must put constraints upon the claims about social justice and disabled people that they currently make