Friday, April 30, 2010

From Margeret,

I am posting this comment from Margeret, it is to Daria's post, but it is too long for a comment so I am making it a separate post. I am doing this because I want to comment on it - all the way here from AERA in Denver

As I was reading Daria’s post for the ten capabilities proposed by Nussbaum I was presented with similar thoughts. I like the idea of focus groups and I am not all that familiar with how they are set up or for that matter how they are even carried out. Anyhow, I did some internet surfing to try and sort some things out. The first thing that comes to mind when reviewing Nussbaum’s capabilities, was a program that incorporates similarities of psychotherapy. So I did some investigating and here are my thoughts.
Nussbaum proposes ten additional capabilities that are perceived to him as being necessary and supported by all democracies. However, I have a couple of points to make regarding these. Deprivations can occur from a variety of means and in many cases individuals may not have the ability to recognize that they are lacking functional capabilities. Now my concerns with Nussbaum’s 10 additional capabilities is that they may be considered important by some, but not all individuals. I saw something on tv last night and so I was able to find a link as evidence of this so maybe my post was rejected for a reason. (http://www.vh1.com/shows/jessica_simpson_the_price_of_beauty/episode.jhtml?episodeID=166391) It’s the show where Jessica Simpson travels around learning beauty regimns across the world. Anyhow, They also meet with an exceptionally poor woman who lives in a favella, but has chosen plastic surgery over a better place to live for herself and her child. She comments this which made me think even more about this class – “The mother chooses this and she’s baffled but Jessica say “This doesn’t mean that the mother is a bad mother for choosing plastic surgery over providing food and shelter to her kids, it may just be that she doesn’t know any better.” And no I was flipping through the channels, I don’t watch this normally! Therefore, by establishing specific capabilities like he has done, he is not allowing the individual the “freedom” to acknowledge what basic and mental needs are necessary for he/she to maximize their abilities and determine the path of their own life rather than having it determined for them which is the paradigm that is currently in place with decisions being made by higher authority.
Now, after researching psychotherapy for quite a long time, I realized that a program approach with this outline perhaps within focus groups could allow for quite a few things. First let me explain what I learned about psychotherapy. There are 13 different approaches but the one that struck me the most was the medical non-medical model approach. The medical model works from a deficit approach where you view the individual as lacking something or having problems. Aside from this the non-medical approach allows individuals to become more aware of their capacity for self-direction and development. This increases the awareness of individuals to not only assess their current capabilities but better understand what factors and how they might be able to increase their capacity to function. The ten factors for Nussbaum are acknowledged indirectly as the individual gains awareness and eventually realizes their potential. The realization of one’s potential comes only when basic and mental needs are fulfilled.
What I believe Nussbaum is proposing is that these 10 capabilities make personal growth possible and that these basic capabilities are both necessary and critical for satisfying lower order necessities making self-actualization possible so that personal growth can occur. Maslow believes self-actualization is growth motivated rather than deficiency motivated. Therefore, the individual is not working from a deficit model.
So I agree that there is a set of basic capabilities that have to be available in order for this personal growth to take place. However, I think his proposed idea would lend more support if he were to give the individual the freedom for determining what resources are more important in allowing the individual to determine what lower deficiency needs are to be met in order for self-actualization to occur. Lower deficiency needs are part of the hierarchy triangle of needs as proposed by Maslow. Now in our first paper prior to meeting the first time, it states that Nussbaum does not believe there is a hierarchy to these needs, but Maslow’s approach does. A person must acknowledge what deficient needs exist and need to be met. It appears that his approach is similar to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. He states that in order for higher level needs to be met the lower level needs must not only be met but maintained. Under this approach, in order for self-actualization to occur the individual must not only achieve the needs of previous levels but master them. Therefore, it defines a concrete set of levels that are dependent upon mastery of specific needs defined in previous levels.
My thing is that I believe that human needs are non-hierarchical. Human experience, whether it be influenced by norms and expectations of other individuals or societies and can be circumstantial and its effects varying by individual. Moreover, specific individuals and communities should be given the freedom to assess what needs and capabilities must be met in order for growth of the individual is not identifying deficient needs that are believed as making them incapable. Instead, humans have an inherent capacity to maximize potential and so the functional capabilities and freedoms come from increasing the individuals sense of their own well being. They merely are not granted capabilities you could give an individual as Nussbaum suggests. They arise from communication and dialogue, changes in behavior, which facilitate improvements allowing individuals to reach their full potential.

2 comments:

  1. Okay, so I just came back from this session on - of course you guessed it - it was John Dewey. It was incredibly frustrating (because the people presenting didn't really know Dewey - long story) but a discussion at the end really made me think of Maggie's comment and Daria's post and made me want to comment on them.

    One woman was delivering a paper on Muslim women wearing a Burka in European schools and being told they weren't allowed to do this. She was saying that the European, cosmopolitan elite should not make these types of decisions - many women choose to wear burkas and that is their choice.

    But one of the questions we must grapple with, that Sen and now Nussbaum make us think about, is what is the meaning of a free choice? Just because you think you freely choose things are you really doing so, or are you internalizing an oppressive system and believing that this is your proper role in the system. Meaning having a free choice means not only having the choice but having enough information and enough capabilities to make the choice you really would make to reach your full functioning.

    Let's take this woman who made the choice for the plastic surgery over having housing and food for her children. Was it really a free choice. Had one of the basic capabilities been taken away from her, the capability to appear in public because of how she felt she was judged according to the way she looked (and I think it is so poetic that somebody like Jessica Simpson who creates this type of unfreedom was commenting on it).

    So this is a question to Daria as well. In therapy how do you know if the people you are working with are making a free choice? That they have enough information and feel that they have the capabilities to do these things. And when you run focus groups how much of the information you are getting actually based on making free choices?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have a question regarding the Burqa presentation - was the focus on the European elites banning the Burqa in an attempt to "free" the Islamic woman or because they are attempting to forcibly assimilate a population out of fear to protect the European way of life? The result of both is authoritariansim which always ultimately results in less capability but an interesting question as it relates to CA. The question of free choice is critical and as we all know, information is frequently unavailable or even if it is, the individual for any number of reasons does not utilize it. I have a sense that the process in discovering if free choice exists would be time-consuming which has implications for the application of CA.

    A different concern involves Nussbaum's ten capabilities and whether in the pursuance of ensuring them authoritarianism can be avoided. This is the main question I struggle with, perhaps due to my cynacism.

    Getting back to the authoritarianism, fear and blatanly impeding capability - the Arizona immigration law could serve as a poster child.

    ReplyDelete