Perfectionism and Ableism

Perfectionism is a theory of well-being which states that well-being is based on human nature: a person's well-being is correlated with the extent to which they develop their characteristically human features. One concern is that perfectionism is an ableist theory of well-being—that it automatically caps the well-being of certain individuals based on their (lack of) physical and mental capabilities. I argue that though at first it seems that perfectionism can be modified such that it is not inherently ableist, this modification does not succeed. I first motivate a definition of perfectionism which holds that features are relevant to well-being proportionally to how different humans would be if they never had that feature. I then explain how well-being can be measured such that a disabled person's well-being is not automatically limited. Next, I argue that this version of perfectionism creates new problems that the theory cannot handle, and thus that perfectionism (as it can best be defended) is ableist. Finally, I show that perfectionism leads to troubling results when used in a consequentialist theory of right action, and thus we should not accept it as an account of well-being.