It is almost commonplace to see disability as an instance of harm. For instance, John Harris claims that disabilities are “physical or mental conditions that constitute a harm to the individual, which a rational person would wish to be without” (2000: 98). Tristram Engelhardt holds: “to see a phenomenon as… a disability is to see something wrong with it” (1996: 197). The received view contends that to be disabled means to have suffered a kind of loss, to be disadvantaged in certain respects, or to be in a deficient physical or mental condition. Many different terms can be utilized for these kinds of negative evaluations of disability, though generally they all follow the same pattern, as they all state that disability is bad for the person who has it. Though many people would agree that it might offer a secondary gain for a person, that is, either an instrumental value such as securing financial or medical support from society or a long-term gain such as a more serious perspective on one’s life, disability as such is hardly ever seen as neutral or even in a positive light. This received view regularly clashes with the viewpoint of people with disabilities. At least some of them claim that they are not harmed by their condition. For instance, Mark Zupan, a quadriplegic rugby player, maintains: “My injury has led me to opportunities and experiences and friendships I would never have had before. And it has taught me about myself. In some ways, it’s the best thing that ever happened to me” (Ebert 2005). A psychiatric patient gives the following account: “Gee, you know, they’re telling me this is a disease. If it’s a disease, this is the one I want to have…. I look at myself as privileged to have had the experiences I had, the experiences they call pathology” (Farber 1993:95). It is easy, on the basis of the received view, to read such statements as rationalizations of disastrous events, as an attempt to find meaning in senseless harm. But I believe that it is a truthful, indeed rational, point of view.