What is your disposition, language, house? ‘Fruitful asynchrony’ and the maker-thinker

References

1. Bhaskar, Roy and Danermark, Berth (2006), ‘Metatheory, interdisciplinarity and disability research: A critical realist perspective’, Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 8:4, pp. 278–97, https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410600914329.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Chen, Jer-Ming and Luetz, Johannes M. (2020), ‘Mono-/inter-/multi-/trans-/anti-disciplinarity in research’, in W. Leal Filho, A. M. Azul, L. Brandli, P. G. Özuyar and T. Wall (eds), Quality Education, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, Cham: Springer, pp. 562–77.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Edgerton, David (2006), The Shock of the Old: Technology and Global History Since 1900, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Ellis, Katie, Garland-Thomson, Rosemarie, Kent, Mike and Robertson, Rachel (eds) (2019), Interdisciplinary Approaches to Disability: Looking Towards the Future, Abingdon: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Gardner, Howard (1983), Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, New York: Basic Books.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Gardner, Howard (1993), Creating Minds: An Anatomy of Creativity Seen Through the Lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi, New York: Basic Books.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Gardner, Howard (2000), Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century, New York: Basic Books.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Gardner, Howard (2001), Good Work: When Excellence and Ethics Meet, New York: Basic Books.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Garland-Thomson, Rosemarie (2011), ‘Misfits: A feminist materialist disability concept’, Hypatia, 26:3, pp. 591–609.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Hamraie, Aimi (2017), Building Access: Universal Design and the Politics of Disability, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Marcovich, Anne and Shinn, Terry (2011), ‘Where is disciplinarity going? Meeting on the borderland’, Social Science Information, 50:3–4, pp. 582–606, https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018411411036.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Oliver, Mike (2013), ‘The social model of disability: Thirty years on’, Disability & Society, 28:7, pp. 1024–26, https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.818773.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Osborne, Peter (2015), ‘Problematizing disciplinarity, transdisciplinary problematics’, Theory, Culture & Society, 32:5–6, pp. 3–35, https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276415592245.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Ott, Katherine (2002), ‘The sum of its parts: An introduction to modern histories of prosthetics’, in K. Ott, D. Serlin and S. Mihm (eds), Artificial Parts, Practical Lives: Modern Histories of Prosthetics, New York: NYU Press, pp. 1–42.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Serlin, David (2004), Replaceable You: Engineering the Body in Postwar America, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Sobchack, Vivian (2006), ‘A leg to stand on: Prosthetics, metaphor, and materiality’, in M. Smith and J. Morra (eds), The Prosthetic Impulse: From A Posthuman Present To A Biocultural Future, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 17–41.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Williamson, Bess (2019), Accessible America: A History of Design and Disability, New York: New York University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Williamson, Bess and Guffey, Elizabeth (eds) (2020), Making Disability Modern: Design Histories, London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Czikszentmihaly, Mihaly (1996), Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, New York: HarperCollins.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Hendren, Sara (2020), What Can a Body Do? How We Meet the Built World, New York: Riverhead Books.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Lepore, Jill (2018), ‘The right way to remember Rachel Carson’, The New Yorker, 19 March, https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/26/the-right-way-to-remember-rachel-carson. Accessed 25 March 2024.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Owens, Janine (2015), ‘Exploring the critiques of the social model of disability: The transformative possibility of Arendt’s notion of power’, Sociology of Health & Illness, 37:3, pp. 385–403.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Shakespeare, Torn and Watson, Nicholas (2001), ‘The social model of disability: An outdated ideology?’, in S. N. Barnartt and B. M. Altman (eds), Exploring Theories and Expanding Methodologies: Where We Are and Where We Need to Go, Research in Social Science and Disability, vol. 2, Leeds: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 9–28.
    [Google Scholar]