ABOUT ME
I completed my BA in philosophy at the University of Nottingham in 2015. I was awarded the Midlands3Cities Masters Studentship and completed my MA in 2016. I was then awarded the Midlands3Cities Doctoral Training Partnership to fund my PhD studies, which focus on adjudicating and advancing the debate between those who think physical disability is likely bad for a person's well-being (even if we discount the effects of discrimination against disabled people) and those who don't. I aim to pursue a career in philosophy and have been gaining teaching experience throughout my academic career. You can find my CV here and my social media at the top of the page. Please feel free to contact me on
THOMAS CRAWLEY
I am a Philosophy PhD candidate studying at the University of Nottingham. My thesis concerns the relationship between physical disability and well-being. I am also interested in various ethical issues (including normative, applied and bioethics), social and political philosophy. My research is currently funded by the Arts Humanities Research Council's Midlands3Cities program.
PUBLICATIONS
Disability, Options and Well-Being
Published in Utilitas (2020)
Abstract: Many endorse the Bad-Difference View (BDV) of disability which says that disability makes one likely to be worse off even in the absence of discrimination against the disabled. Others defend the Mere-Difference View (MDV) of disability which says that, discounting discrimination, disability does not make one likely to be worse (or better) off. A common motivation for the BDV is the Options Argument which identifies reduction in valuable options as a harm of disability. Some reject this argument, arguing that disabled people's prospects aren't hindered by having fewer options. In this article, I defend the Options Argument by arguing that, in disability cases, possessing a greater number of valuable options seems to overall improve well-being prospects. As such, the Options Argument appears to be sound and – although it doesn't establish the BDV – it lends plausibility to the BDV by identifying a potentially significant cost of disability.
