Misplaced Pages

Dignity: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:45, 3 January 2010 editLudwigs2 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers19,240 editsm Reverted edits by Pyrrhon8 (talk) to last version by Ludwigs2← Previous edit Revision as of 17:26, 4 January 2010 edit undoPyrrhon8 (talk | contribs)672 edits Undid revision 335706116 by Ludwigs2 (talk) Ludwigs2 is a DISRUPTIVE EDITOR. His edits are unsourced and detrimental.Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Otheruses1|dignity as a moral or political right}} {{Otheruses1|dignity as a matter of philosophy, religion, law, and human rights}}
'''Dignity''' found its way into English through French from Latin before the ].<ref name = "DIC">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dignity</ref> At that time, dignity was a quality akin to nobility, majesty, and wonderfulness, and philosophers found dignity in assorted ideas and in various beings. Later, ] thought that dignity was being granted to too many ideas and beings. He said that a human was the only being, and the human capacity for morality was the only idea, that had dignity.
'''Dignity''' is a term used in ], ], and political discussions to signify that a being has an innate right to respect and ethical treatment. It is an extension of ]-era beliefs that individuals have inherent, inviolable rights, and thus is closely related to concepts like ], ], ], ], ], and enlightened ]. Dignity is generally proscriptive and cautionary: in politics it is usually synonymous to 'human dignity', and is used to critique the treatment of oppressed and vulnerable groups and peoples, though in some case has been extended to apply to cultures and sub-cultures, religious beliefs and ideals, animals used for food or research, and even plants. In more colloquial settings it is used to suggest that someone is not receiving a proper degree of respect, or even that they are failing to treat themselves with proper self-respect.


In the twentieth century, dignity appeared in assorted writings (including international proclamations and conventions) as a reason for peacemaking and for promoting human rights. Academics discovered that many people accepted the idea of dignity as a synonym for ''humanness''. The academics discovered that many people claimed to believe that being human means having dignity, and that having dignity means being entitled to respect and to human rights. The academics further discovered, however, that people had tacit qualifications attached to their idea of a human being; many people were not granting humanness to every '']''. According to the academics, many people hold the view that only some people have dignity, and only some people deserve respect and rights.
While dignity is a term with a long philosophical history, it is rarely defined outright in political, legal, and scientific discussions. International proclamations have thus far left dignity undefined,<ref>"Those provisions concerning human dignity have not been authoritatively interpreted or applied by any of the competent, independent, international institutions." Bartha Maria Knoppers, ''Human Dignity and Genetic Heritage: Study Paper'' (Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1991), note, at 23. None of the international proclamations make dignity the rare quality that some commentators say it should be.</ref><ref>Myres S. McDougal, Harold D. Lasswell, and Lung-chu Chen, ''Human Rights and World Public Order: The Basic Policies of an International Law of Human Dignity'' (New Haven: Yale UP, 1980), note, at 376.</ref> and scientific commentators, such as those arguing against genetic research and ], cite dignity as a reason but are ambiguous about its application.<ref>Aldergrove says dignity means ''the set of attributes that distinguish an intelligent, solemn, sober, healthy, independent, adult homo sapiens (the model adult) from someone else, especially a young child or a lunatic''. J. R. Aldergrove, ''Why We Are Not Obsolete Yet: Genetics, Algeny, and the Future'' (Stentorian: Burnaby, 2000) at 71.</ref>
<!-- hiding ref for the moment<ref> Thurber says dignity "has gleamed only now and then and here and there, in lonely splendor, throughout the ages, a hope of the better men, never an achievement of the majority." James Thurber, 'Thinking Ourselves Into Trouble,' pt. 3, ''Collecting Himself: James Thurber on Writing and Writers, Humor and Himself'', Michael J. Rosen ed. (Harper & Row, 1989).</ref> -->


Aldergrove and others say that using dignity as the reason for rights is no different than using preciousness or any other abstraction as the reason for rights. Dignity, Aldergrove says, does not explain what rights people should have any better than "just because" does. McDougal ''et al'' point out that dignity can be used to justify one set of rights, and to justify another set of rights that nullify the first set.
==Philosophical history==
in 1486, ] presented his ] to a crowd of hostile clerics, in which he argued that men should emulate the "dignity and glory" of the angels, through the pursuit of philosophy and the liberal arts. This oration is commonly seen as one of the central texts of the ], intimately tied with the growth of humanist philosphies.


Aldergrove notes that some commentators use dignity to mean something other than humanness. Aldergrove observes that, when dignity is something other than "humanness," dignity does not become a better reason for rights. Redefining dignity does not overcome the ].
⚫ ] held that there were things that should not be discussed in terms of value, and that these things could be said to have dignity. 'Value' is necessarily relative, because the value of something depends on a particular observer’s judgment of that thing. Things that are ''not'' relative - that are ''"ends in themselves"'', in Kant's terminology - are by extension beyond all value, and a thing is an ''end in itself'' only if it has a moral dimension; if it represents a choice between right and wrong. In Kant's words: "Morality, and humanity as capable of it, is that which alone has dignity.”<ref>Immanuel Kant, ''Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals'', trans. by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott (Second Section: Transition From Popular Moral Philosophy To The Metaphysic Of Morals).</ref>


Some contemporary proclamations and conventions as well as some laws and policies use dignity as the justification for their provisions. Consequently, dignity is an issue for physicians, medical researchers, and ethicists. It is an issue for legislators, jurists, lawyers, and human rights defenders.
⚫ Dan Egonsson, followed by Roger Wertheimer, argue that it is conventional for people to equate dignity with 'being human' (Egonsson's 'Standard Attitude', Wertheimer's 'Standard Belief').<ref>Dan Egonsson, ''Dimensions of Dignity: The Moral Importance of Being Human'' (Dordrecht, Sweden: Kluwer Academic, 1998) 132.</ref><ref>Roger Wertheimer, “Philosophy on Humanity,” in ''Abortion: Pro and Con'', R. L. Perkins ed. (Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman, 1974) 107-28.</ref> Both, however, claim that people generally import something other than mere humanness to their idea of dignity: Egonsson suggesting that an entity must be both human and ''alive'' to merit an ascription of dignity.observed that, while some people claim to have the Standard Attitude, they use language that indicates that they have attached conditions other than humanness to their idea of dignity, while Wertheimer states "it is not a definitional truth that human beings have human status."


==Philosophy==
⚫ Aldergrove claims that equating dignity with being human is a conceit - "an excuse to feel the way you want, or to do what you want."<ref name="Alder">{{cite book
A philosopher of the ], ], in his ']', spoke in front of hostile clerics of the dignity of the liberal arts and of the dignity and glory of ]s.

⚫ A philosopher of the ], ] said some things should not be discussed in terms of ''value'', which is necessarily relative (because value depends on an observer’s judgment). Kant said those things beyond all value have dignity. Kant identified those things that are beyond all value as ''ends in themselves''. Something is an end in itself if it has morality; that is, if it can make choices between right and wrong. Kant said "morality, and humanity as capable of it, is that which alone has dignity.”<ref>Immanuel Kant, ''Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals'', trans. by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott (Second Section: Transition From Popular Moral Philosophy To The Metaphysic Of Morals).</ref>

⚫ Egonsson called the belief that equates dignity with being human the Standard Attitude.<ref>Dan Egonsson, ''Dimensions of Dignity: The Moral Importance of Being Human'' (Dordrecht, Sweden: Kluwer Academic, 1998) 132.</ref> Roger Wertheimer called the equating of dignity with humanness the Standard Belief.<ref>Roger Wertheimer, “Philosophy on Humanity,” in ''Abortion: Pro and Con'', R. L. Perkins ed. (Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman, 1974) 107-28.</ref> Egonsson observed that, while some people claim to have the Standard Attitude, they use language that indicates that they have attached conditions other than humanness to their idea of dignity. Wertheimer agreed. He said "it is not a definitional truth that human beings have human status." Egonsson said the minimal conditions that most people attach to their grant of dignity to an entity is that the entity be both human and ''alive''.

⚫ Aldergrove says dignity, when it is used to mean being human, is a conceit. Having dignity, he contends, is no different from having preciousness or greatness or specialness or glory. Aldergrove said a conceit is "an excuse to feel the way you want, or to do what you want."<ref name="Alder">{{cite book
| last = Aldergrove | last = Aldergrove
| first = John Romney | first = John Romney
Line 20: Line 25:
| location = Burnaby | location = Burnaby
| pages = 198 | pages = 198
| isbn = 0-9682932-1-2}}</ref> Aldergrove says a conceit is a way of creating an authority out of nothing. He says a conceit is equal to ''just because'' as a reason for anything.<ref name="Alder"/>{{rp|}} He insists dignity "can be an excuse for any law or policy."<ref name="Alder"/>{{rp|}} | isbn = 0-9682932-1-2}}</ref> Aldergrove says a conceit is a way of creating an authority out of nothing. He says a conceit is equal to ''just because'' as a reason for anything.<ref name="Alder"/>{{rp|}}He insists dignity "can be an excuse for any law or policy."<ref name="Alder"/>{{rp|}}


Aldergrove notes that dignity, regardless of its meaning, cannot justify the claims that commentators attach to it. Aldergrove says those claims are precluded by the observation of Scottish philosopher ]. Hume noted that an is-statement does not give rise logically to just one ought-statement (''the ]''). Thus we cannot go ''logically'' from “we are human” to some ''therefore'' about what we ought to do or believe.<ref name="Alder"/>{{rp|}} Aldergrove notes that dignity, regardless of its meaning, cannot justify the claims that commentators attach to it. Aldergrove says those claims are precluded by the observation of Scottish philosopher ]. Hume noted that an is-statement does not give rise logically to just one ought-statement (''the ]''). Thus we cannot go ''logically'' from “we are human” to some ''therefore'' about what we ought to do or believe.<ref name="Alder"/>{{rp|}}
Line 74: Line 79:
McDougal, Lasswell, and Chen studied dignity as a basis for international law.<ref>Myres S. McDougal, Harold D. Lasswell, and Lung-chu Chen, ''Human Rights and World Public Order: The Basic Policies of an International Law of Human Dignity'' (New Haven: Yale UP, 1980).</ref> They said that using dignity as the basis for laws was a "] approach."<ref>McDougal et al, note, at 70.</ref> The natural law approach, they said, depends upon "exercises of faith."<ref>McDougal et al, note, at 69.</ref> McDougal, Lasswell, and Chen observed:<ref>McDougal et al, note, at 71.</ref> McDougal, Lasswell, and Chen studied dignity as a basis for international law.<ref>Myres S. McDougal, Harold D. Lasswell, and Lung-chu Chen, ''Human Rights and World Public Order: The Basic Policies of an International Law of Human Dignity'' (New Haven: Yale UP, 1980).</ref> They said that using dignity as the basis for laws was a "] approach."<ref>McDougal et al, note, at 70.</ref> The natural law approach, they said, depends upon "exercises of faith."<ref>McDougal et al, note, at 69.</ref> McDougal, Lasswell, and Chen observed:<ref>McDougal et al, note, at 71.</ref>
{{cquote|The abiding difficulty with the natural law approach is that its assumptions, intellectual procedures, and modalities of justification can be employed equally by the proponents of human dignity and the proponents of human indignity in support of diametrically opposed empirical specifications of rights . . . .}} {{cquote|The abiding difficulty with the natural law approach is that its assumptions, intellectual procedures, and modalities of justification can be employed equally by the proponents of human dignity and the proponents of human indignity in support of diametrically opposed empirical specifications of rights . . . .}}

===Canada=== ===Canada===
In 2004, Canada enacted the . Section 2(b) of the Act states, "the benefits of assisted human reproductive technologies and related research for individuals, for families and for society in general can be most effectively secured by taking appropriate measures for the protection and promotion of human health, safety, dignity and rights in the use of these technologies and in related research." The Act prescribes a fine not exceeding $500,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or both, if someone undertakes a proscribed activity such as the creation of a ]. In 2004, Canada enacted the . Section 2(b) of the Act states, "the benefits of assisted human reproductive technologies and related research for individuals, for families and for society in general can be most effectively secured by taking appropriate measures for the protection and promotion of human health, safety, dignity and rights in the use of these technologies and in related research." The Act prescribes a fine not exceeding $500,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or both, if someone undertakes a proscribed activity such as the creation of a ].
Line 81: Line 87:


===Germany=== ===Germany===
Human dignity is the fundamental principle of the ]. Article 1, paragraph 1 reads: ''"Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority."'' <ref>http://www.bundestag.de/interakt/infomat/fremdsprachiges_material/downloads/ggEn_download.pdf</ref> Human dignity is thus mentioned even before the ]. This has a significant impact on German law-making and jurisdiction in both serious and trivial items: Human dignity is the fundamental principle of the ], and is mentioned before the ]. Article 1, paragraph 1 reads: ''Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority.'' <ref>http://www.bundestag.de/interakt/informationsmaterial_alt/fremdsprachiges_material/downloads/ggEn_download.pdf</ref>


;Examples of dignity's effect upon German law:
*Human dignity is the basis of § 131 ], which prohibits the depiction of cruelty against humans in an approving way. § 131 has been used to confiscate ] and to ban ]s like '']'' and the '']'' series. *Human dignity is the basis of § 131 ], which prohibits the depiction of cruelty against humans in an approving way. § 131 has been used to confiscate ] and to ban ]s like '']'' and the '']'' series.
*A by the ] in 1977 said ] without the possibility of ] is unconstitutional as a violation of human dignity (and the '']'' principle). Today, a prisoner serving a life term can be granted parole on good behavior as early as 15 years after being incarcerated, provided that his release is held to constitute little danger to the public. Note that persons deemed still dangerous can be incarcerated indefinitely on a life term, if this judgment is regularly reaffirmed. *A by the ] in 1977 said ] without the possibility of ] is unconstitutional as a violation of human dignity (and the '']'' principle). Today, a prisoner serving a life term can be granted parole on good behavior as early as 15 years after being incarcerated if he is not dangerous. Dangerous prisoners on a life term can be incarcerated indefinitely, but such incarceration is subject to regular review by a court.
*§ 14(3) of the ], which would have allowed the ] to shoot down airliners if they are used as weapons by terrorists, was declared unconstitutional mainly on the grounds of human dignity: killing a small number of innocent people to save a large number cannot be legalized since it treats dignity as if it were a measurable and limited quantity. *§ 14(3) of the ], which would have allowed the ] to shoot down airliners if they are used as weapons by terrorists, was declared unconstitutional mainly on the grounds of human dignity. The killing of a small number of innocent people to save a large number was deemed illegal because the section treats dignity as if it were a measurable and limited quantity.
*A ] advertisement showing human buttocks with an "] positive" stamp was declared a violation of human dignity by some courts, but in the end found legal. *A ] advertisement showing human buttocks with an "] positive" stamp was declared a violation of human dignity by some courts, but in the end found legal.
*The first German law legalizing ] in 1975 was declared unconstitutional because the court held that ]s had human dignity.<ref></ref> A new law on abortion was developed in the 1990s. This law makes all abortions ''de jure'' illegal, but the state does not prosecute early-term abortion if preceded by counseling. *In 1975, a court declared the first German law legalizing ] unconstitutional because the law threatened the human dignity of ]s.<ref></ref> In the 1990s, Germany developed a new law by which the state does not prosecute anyone for an early-term abortion if it is preceded by counseling.
*In a decision from 1981-12-15, the ''Bundesverwaltungsgericht'' declared that ]s violated the human dignity of the performer, regardless of her feelings. The decision was later revised. Peep shows where the performer cannot see the persons who are watching her remain prohibited as a matter of dignity. *On 15 December 1981, the ''Bundesverwaltungsgericht'' declared that ]s violated the human dignity of the performer, regardless of her feelings. In a subsequent decision, the ''Bundesverwaltungsgericht'' held that the performer's dignity was not violated if she could see the persons who were watching her.{{Fact}}


===Switzerland=== ===Switzerland===
Line 115: Line 122:


==External links== ==External links==
* Hickman, John. . ''Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel'', 5 November 2007. Retrieved 2009-03-30.
{{wikiquote}} {{wikiquote}}
* Aldergrove, John Romney. . (231 kb — 30 seconds by dial-up) Retrieved 2009-03-27. * Aldergrove, John Romney. . (231 kb — 30 seconds by dial-up) Retrieved 2009-03-27.
* Pinker, Stephen. , ''The New Republic'', 28 May 2008. Retrieved 2008-11-07. * Hickman, John. . ''Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel'', 5 November 2007. Retrieved 2009-03-30.
* Macklin, Ruth. , ''BMJ'' 2003;327(7429):1419 (20 December). Retrieved 2009-03-27. * Macklin, Ruth. , ''BMJ'' 2003;327(7429):1419 (20 December). Retrieved 2009-03-27.
PELE, Antonio: The concept of human dignity (Spanish)e-­archivo.­uc3m.­es/­handle/­10016/­3052 * Pele, Antonio. ''The concept of human dignity'' (Spanish) e-­archivo.­uc3m.­es/­handle/­10016/­3052.
* Pinker, Stephen. , ''The New Republic'', 28 May 2008. Retrieved 2008-11-07.


{{Human rights}} {{Human rights}}

Revision as of 17:26, 4 January 2010

For other uses, see dignity as a matter of philosophy, religion, law, and human rights.

Dignity found its way into English through French from Latin before the Renaissance. At that time, dignity was a quality akin to nobility, majesty, and wonderfulness, and philosophers found dignity in assorted ideas and in various beings. Later, Immanuel Kant thought that dignity was being granted to too many ideas and beings. He said that a human was the only being, and the human capacity for morality was the only idea, that had dignity.

In the twentieth century, dignity appeared in assorted writings (including international proclamations and conventions) as a reason for peacemaking and for promoting human rights. Academics discovered that many people accepted the idea of dignity as a synonym for humanness. The academics discovered that many people claimed to believe that being human means having dignity, and that having dignity means being entitled to respect and to human rights. The academics further discovered, however, that people had tacit qualifications attached to their idea of a human being; many people were not granting humanness to every homo sapiens. According to the academics, many people hold the view that only some people have dignity, and only some people deserve respect and rights.

Aldergrove and others say that using dignity as the reason for rights is no different than using preciousness or any other abstraction as the reason for rights. Dignity, Aldergrove says, does not explain what rights people should have any better than "just because" does. McDougal et al point out that dignity can be used to justify one set of rights, and to justify another set of rights that nullify the first set.

Aldergrove notes that some commentators use dignity to mean something other than humanness. Aldergrove observes that, when dignity is something other than "humanness," dignity does not become a better reason for rights. Redefining dignity does not overcome the is-ought_problem.

Some contemporary proclamations and conventions as well as some laws and policies use dignity as the justification for their provisions. Consequently, dignity is an issue for physicians, medical researchers, and ethicists. It is an issue for legislators, jurists, lawyers, and human rights defenders.

Philosophy

A philosopher of the Renaissance, Pico della Mirandola, in his 'Oration on the Dignity of Man', spoke in front of hostile clerics of the dignity of the liberal arts and of the dignity and glory of angels.

A philosopher of the Age of Enlightenment, Immanuel Kant said some things should not be discussed in terms of value, which is necessarily relative (because value depends on an observer’s judgment). Kant said those things beyond all value have dignity. Kant identified those things that are beyond all value as ends in themselves. Something is an end in itself if it has morality; that is, if it can make choices between right and wrong. Kant said "morality, and humanity as capable of it, is that which alone has dignity.”

Egonsson called the belief that equates dignity with being human the Standard Attitude. Roger Wertheimer called the equating of dignity with humanness the Standard Belief. Egonsson observed that, while some people claim to have the Standard Attitude, they use language that indicates that they have attached conditions other than humanness to their idea of dignity. Wertheimer agreed. He said "it is not a definitional truth that human beings have human status." Egonsson said the minimal conditions that most people attach to their grant of dignity to an entity is that the entity be both human and alive.

Aldergrove says dignity, when it is used to mean being human, is a conceit. Having dignity, he contends, is no different from having preciousness or greatness or specialness or glory. Aldergrove said a conceit is "an excuse to feel the way you want, or to do what you want." Aldergrove says a conceit is a way of creating an authority out of nothing. He says a conceit is equal to just because as a reason for anything.He insists dignity "can be an excuse for any law or policy."

Aldergrove notes that dignity, regardless of its meaning, cannot justify the claims that commentators attach to it. Aldergrove says those claims are precluded by the observation of Scottish philosopher David Hume. Hume noted that an is-statement does not give rise logically to just one ought-statement (the is-ought_problem). Thus we cannot go logically from “we are human” to some therefore about what we ought to do or believe.

Proclamations and Conventions

Through much of the 20 Century, dignity appeared in assorted writings as a reason for peacemaking and for promoting human rights. For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948, states:

Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Subsequent proclamations also invoke dignity in the call for more rights. For example, the American Convention on Human Rights (1969), article 11(1), proclaims, "Everyone has the right to have his honor respected and his dignity recognized." The African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (1981), art. 5, insists, "Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being." All the international proclamations leave dignity undefined.

At the beginning of the 21 Century, dignity was a reason to curtail human rights. Clergy and laity invoked dignity to explain their agreement with resolutions that were being approved by the United Nations. Those resolutions bid all nations to restrict rights by imposing legal sanctions upon blasphemy (defamation of religion) and upon all conduct that a religious person might find offensive. One archbishop favored legal sanctions because, he said, it is "the manipulation and defamation of religion which threatens human dignity, rights, peace and security." One law professor hoped "the law against defamation of religions may be constructed in a way that does not abridge legitimate speech including artistic freedom and yet protects the dignity of religion." On 26 March 2009, the United Nations Human Rights Council adopted a non-binding resolution that states, "defamation of religions is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of religion of their adherents and incitement to religious hatred and violence."

Medicine

In the 20th century, dignity became an issue for physicians and medical researchers.

International Bodies

In June 1964, the World Medical Association issued the Declaration of Helsinki. The Declaration says at article 11, "It is the duty of physicians who participate in medical research to protect the life, health, dignity, integrity, right to self-determination, privacy, and confidentiality of personal information of research subjects."

The Council of Europe invoked dignity in its effort to govern the progress of biology and medicine. On 4 April 1997, the Council, at Oviedo, approved the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine. The convention's preamble contains these statements, among others:

Conscious of the accelerating developments in biology and medicine;

Convinced of the need to respect the human being both as an individual and as a member of the human species and recognising the importance of ensuring the dignity of the human being;

Conscious that the misuse of biology and medicine may lead to acts endangering human dignity;

Resolving to take such measures as are necessary to safeguard human dignity and the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual with regard to the application of biology and medicine.

The Convention states, "Parties to this Convention shall protect the dignity and identity of all human beings and guarantee everyone, without discrimination, respect for their integrity and other rights and fundamental freedoms with regard to the application of biology and medicine."

In 1998, the United Nations mentioned dignity in the UNESCO Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. At Article 2, the declaration states, “Everyone has a right to respect for their dignity.” At Article 24, the declaration warns that treating a person to remove a genetic defect "could be contrary to human dignity." The Commentary that accompanies the declaration says that, as a consequence of the possibility of germ-line treatment, "it is the very dignity of the human race which is at stake."

Canada

In 1996, the Government of Canada issued a report entitled New Reproductive and Genetic Technologies. The report used “the principles of respect for human life and dignity” as its reason for recommending that various activities associated with genetic research and human reproduction be prohibited. The report said the prohibited activities were “contrary to Canadian values of equality and respect for human life and dignity.”

Denmark

The Ministry of Health enacted the ‘‘Danish Council Act 1988’’, which established the Danish Council of Ethics. The Council advises the Ministry on matters of medicine and genetic research on humans. In 2001, the Council condemned "reproductive cloning because it would violate human dignity, because it could have adverse consequences for the cloned person and because permitting research on reproductive cloning would reflect a disregard for the respect due to the moral status of embryos."

France

In 1984, France set up the National Consultative Committee for Ethics in the Life and Health Sciences (CCNE) to advise the government about the regulation of medical practices and research. In 1986, the CCNE said, "Respect for human dignity must guide both the development of knowledge and the limits or rules to be observed by research." The CCNE said that research on human embryos must be subject to "the rule of reason" and must have regard for "undefined dignity in its practical consequences." The CCNE insisted that, in research on human embryos, the ethical principles that should apply are "respecting human dignity" and respecting "the dignity of science."

Portugal

The National Council of Ethics of Portugal published its Opinion on the Ethical Implications of Cloning in 1997. The opinion states, “the cloning of human beings, because of the problems it raises concerning the dignity of the human person, the equilibrium of the human species and life in society, is ethically unacceptable and must be prohibited.”

Sweden

Sweden's The Genetic Integrity Act (2006:351), The Biobanks in Medical Care Act (2002:297), Health and Medical Services (Professional Activities) Act (1998:531), and The Health and Medical Services Act (1982:763) all express concern for "the integrity of the individual" or "human dignity."

Switzerland

The Constitution says Swiss citizens must respect the dignity of animals, plants, and other organisms. Accordingly, the Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH) published a brochure in 2008 about how researchers can respect the dignity of plants.

United States

In 2008, The President's Council on Bioethics tried to arrive at a consensus about what dignity meant but failed. Edmund D. Pellegrino, M.D., the Council's Chairman, says in the Letter of Transmittal to the President of The United States, "… there is no universal agreement on the meaning of the term, human dignity."

Law

McDougal, Lasswell, and Chen studied dignity as a basis for international law. They said that using dignity as the basis for laws was a "natural law approach." The natural law approach, they said, depends upon "exercises of faith." McDougal, Lasswell, and Chen observed:

The abiding difficulty with the natural law approach is that its assumptions, intellectual procedures, and modalities of justification can be employed equally by the proponents of human dignity and the proponents of human indignity in support of diametrically opposed empirical specifications of rights . . . .

Canada

In 2004, Canada enacted the Assisted Human Reproduction Act. Section 2(b) of the Act states, "the benefits of assisted human reproductive technologies and related research for individuals, for families and for society in general can be most effectively secured by taking appropriate measures for the protection and promotion of human health, safety, dignity and rights in the use of these technologies and in related research." The Act prescribes a fine not exceeding $500,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or both, if someone undertakes a proscribed activity such as the creation of a chimera.

France

In 1997, the National Consultative Committee for Ethics in the Life and Health Sciences, as well as other observers, noted that France's dignity-based laws on bio-medical research were paradoxical. The law prohibited the willful destruction of human embryos but directed that human embryos could be destroyed if they were more than five years old. The law prohibited research on human embryos created in France but permitted research on human embryos brought to France. The law prohibited researchers from creating embryos for research but allowed researchers to experiment with embryos that were superfluous after in vitro fertilization.

Germany

Human dignity is the fundamental principle of the German constitution, and is mentioned before the right to life. Article 1, paragraph 1 reads: Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority.

Examples of dignity's effect upon German law
  • Human dignity is the basis of § 131 StGB, which prohibits the depiction of cruelty against humans in an approving way. § 131 has been used to confiscate horror movies and to ban video games like Manhunt and the Mortal Kombat series.
  • A decision by the German Federal Constitutional Court in 1977 said life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is unconstitutional as a violation of human dignity (and the Rechtsstaat principle). Today, a prisoner serving a life term can be granted parole on good behavior as early as 15 years after being incarcerated if he is not dangerous. Dangerous prisoners on a life term can be incarcerated indefinitely, but such incarceration is subject to regular review by a court.
  • § 14(3) of the Luftsicherheitsgesetz, which would have allowed the Bundeswehr to shoot down airliners if they are used as weapons by terrorists, was declared unconstitutional mainly on the grounds of human dignity. The killing of a small number of innocent people to save a large number was deemed illegal because the section treats dignity as if it were a measurable and limited quantity.
  • A Benetton advertisement showing human buttocks with an "H.I.V. positive" stamp was declared a violation of human dignity by some courts, but in the end found legal.
  • In 1975, a court declared the first German law legalizing abortion unconstitutional because the law threatened the human dignity of embryos. In the 1990s, Germany developed a new law by which the state does not prosecute anyone for an early-term abortion if it is preceded by counseling.
  • On 15 December 1981, the Bundesverwaltungsgericht declared that peep shows violated the human dignity of the performer, regardless of her feelings. In a subsequent decision, the Bundesverwaltungsgericht held that the performer's dignity was not violated if she could see the persons who were watching her.

Switzerland

The Swiss Constitution states at Article 7, “Human dignity is to be respected and protected.” The Constitution mentions dignity again in relation to medicine and genetics:

Article 119a Transplantation Medicine

(1) The Federation adopts rules in the field of transplantation of organs, tissue, and cells. It provides thereby for the protection of human dignity, personality, and health. (2) The Federation establishes particularly criteria for the just assignment of organs. (3) Donations of human organs, tissue, and cells are free of charge. The trade with human organs is prohibited.

Article 120 Gene Technology in the Non-Human Field
(1) Humans and their environment are protected against abuse of gene technology.

(2) The Federation adopts rules on the use of reproductive and genetic material of animals, plants, and other organisms. It takes thereby into account the dignity of the creature and the security of man, animal and environment, and protects the genetic multiplicity of animal and plant species.


See also

References

  1. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dignity
  2. Immanuel Kant, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals, trans. by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott (Second Section: Transition From Popular Moral Philosophy To The Metaphysic Of Morals).
  3. Dan Egonsson, Dimensions of Dignity: The Moral Importance of Being Human (Dordrecht, Sweden: Kluwer Academic, 1998) 132.
  4. Roger Wertheimer, “Philosophy on Humanity,” in Abortion: Pro and Con, R. L. Perkins ed. (Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman, 1974) 107-28.
  5. ^ Aldergrove, John Romney (2000). Why We Are Not Obsolete Yet: Genetics, Algeny, and the Future. Burnaby: Stentorian. p. 198. ISBN 0-9682932-1-2.
  6. None of the international proclamations suggest dignity is the rare quality that some commentators say it should be. Aldergrove says dignity means the set of attributes that distinguish an intelligent, solemn, sober, healthy, independent, adult homo sapiens (the model adult) from someone else, especially a young child or a lunatic (Aldergrove, 71). Thurber says dignity "has gleamed only now and then and here and there, in lonely splendor, throughout the ages, a hope of the better men, never an achievement of the majority" (James Thurber, 'Thinking Ourselves Into Trouble,' pt. 3, Collecting Himself: James Thurber on Writing and Writers, Humor and Himself, Michael J. Rosen ed. (Harper & Row, 1989)).
  7. G.A. Res. 60/150; U.N. Doc. A/Res/60/150; G.A. Res. 61/164; U.N. Doc. A/Res/61/164; G.A. Res. 62/154; U.N. Doc. A/Res/62/154.
  8. Archbishop Defends Religious Freedom to U.N. Council 2006-07-14.
  9. Khan, Liaquat Ali. 'Combating Defamation of Religions' 1 January 2007.
  10. United Nations Human Rights Council on religious defamation," 26 March 2009 Retrieved 2009-03-30.
  11. Declaration of Helsinki by World Medical Association
  12. Bill in Parliament of Canada 1996
  13. Gratton, Brigitte. http://www.etiskraad.dk/sw293.asp Survey on the National Regulations in the European Union regarding Research on Human Embryos (July 2002), 16.
  14. ^ http://www.ccne-ethique.fr/docs/en/avis008.pdf CCNE Opinion no. 8.
  15. Gratton, Brigitte. http://www.etiskraad.dk/sw293.asp Survey on the National Regulations in the European Union regarding Research on Human Embryos (July 2002), 53.
  16. Swedish statutes.
  17. Dignity of Plants.
  18. http://www.bioethics.gov Human Dignity and Bioethics: Essays Commissioned by the President's Council on Bioethics March 2008.
  19. Myres S. McDougal, Harold D. Lasswell, and Lung-chu Chen, Human Rights and World Public Order: The Basic Policies of an International Law of Human Dignity (New Haven: Yale UP, 1980).
  20. McDougal et al, note, at 70.
  21. McDougal et al, note, at 69.
  22. McDougal et al, note, at 71.
  23. ^ http://www.ccne-ethique.fr/docs/en/avis053.pdf CCNE Opinion no. 053.
  24. Cazeau, Bernard. http://www.senat.fr/senfic/cazeau_bernard98029w.html (in French). Retrieved 2009-04-11.
  25. http://www.bundestag.de/interakt/informationsmaterial_alt/fremdsprachiges_material/downloads/ggEn_download.pdf
  26. German law about abortion.
  27. Swiss Constitution.

External links


Human rights
Fundamental concepts
and philosophies
Distinctions
Aspects
Organizations
By continent
Human rights abuses
Related
Categories:
Dignity: Difference between revisions Add topic