Disability criticisms of Do androids dream of electric sheep?
Like many other sci-fi stories, Phillip K. Dick's Do androids dream of electric sheep has futuristic setting that once again redefines what is normal. In terms of disability criticism, the societal statuses for this story range from abnormal to normal to great. The Pennfield mood organ that regulates emotions in humans and raising animals is normal. Being worthy enough to migrate to Mars and live a luxurious life with androids to serve you is great. If a person fails to be normal or great, you are left with chickenheads like John Isidore and rebel androids who want to pass for human. While the novel gives us a clear idea of what this society considers normal and acceptable, there points in the story where the lines between normal and abnormal blur.
Iran Deckard's confliction with the mood organ is a fair example of the deviancy within being common. "I think that's a reasonable amount of time to feel hopeless about everything, about staying here on Earth after everybody who's smart has emigrated'" (1.17). Most would think that the concept of choosing to be depressed for any amount of time is strange. However, Iran sees
…show more content…
Like most androids in this novel, they are unable to grasp empathy and its value. Irmgard even stated: "Isn't [empathy] a way of proving that humans can do something we can't? Because without the Mercer experience we just have your word that you feel this empathy business, this shared, group thing"(18.59). Their inability to understand and use empathy is something the majority of society, in this novel's universe and our own, would find disturbing. Are their sociopathic traits any different from humans born with said traits? Should both groups be punished for not being created with empathy? One does not necessarily need empathy to survive but hurting innocent people will always be a