*nods* Having fought my way through Adolf Hitler's book, I definitely agree with the pathological certainty being a prerequisite for vicious dictators. The number of things he stated as obvious facts, in full view of a multitude of contradictory facts, was baffling.
The problem is, if you make something like human dignity the basis of your law, how can you not have a definition of it?
Not defining the term too strictly might be good, but otoh I really wouldn't want the idea of humanity to be defined by common consensus. A large number of people have ideas on the subject I wouldn't want to see codified.
"what is it worth"---Ok what is it worth, in money? But one could argue that dignity is attained or lost or rejected. But can one really buy dignity? Yes, humans can --reject-- dignity.
I see dignity as a form of self respect and in part extending that respect to others. If one has no self respect, they have no dignity.
A phrase I never understood was "die with dignity". There is no dignity in death. Death by definition is simply the point at which a biological functioning stops. It is simply a fact.
Dignity aside. There are people too stupid, too deranged to be considered human beings, IMHO.
A definition of human that applies to everyone, dignity aside? Any living entitiy that was created by human DNA. That applies to everything- fetus, comotose, the deranged, and the good.
Kant says that one should never treat another human being just as means to an end, but always also as an end in itself. That means treating yourself that way, too. That's probably what self-respect and respect of others is all about.
If dignity is defined by self-respect and respect of others, while there might be no dignity in the stopping of life functions, there can be dignity in how you act in the time leading up to that moment. So maybe not dignity in death, but dignity during the process of dying, if that makes sense.
The problem with saying somebody is too stupid or deranged to be considered human is the consequence of that verdict. I think that is where it becomes most important to have some sort of law preventing individual views to become judicial decisions.
I don't know. I think the difference between an embryo and a baby is the difference between a seed and a tree. I say this as someone who risked my own health to give birth to an unplanned child.
I would also say it's too wide an assumption to say what the roots of human worth is in Christianity. The more research I do the more I see that from the death of Jesus Christianity has been splintered into very diverse groups with very different points of view.
Today many Christians, particularly in the U.S., look on people who refuse to convert as soulless sub-humans, while others see females or non-whites as less human than others. I think you need more defined parameters while keeping in mind that many other beliefs and religions have their own respect for human worth.
I didn't mean to imply that the only possible root for human worth is Christianity. It's one option, and I know many who call themselves Christian don't follow the belief that all humans were created in the image of the God they claim to believe in. The created in God's image thing is one way to say that humans are different from any other living thing on the planet, and just through this have their own dignity that is not a result of what they do or what they own.
Comments 7
(The comment has been removed)
Having fought my way through Adolf Hitler's book, I definitely agree with the pathological certainty being a prerequisite for vicious dictators. The number of things he stated as obvious facts, in full view of a multitude of contradictory facts, was baffling.
The problem is, if you make something like human dignity the basis of your law, how can you not have a definition of it?
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
I see dignity as a form of self respect and in part extending that respect to others. If one has no self respect, they have no dignity.
A phrase I never understood was "die with dignity". There is no dignity in death. Death by definition is simply the point at which a biological functioning stops. It is simply a fact.
Dignity aside. There are people too stupid, too deranged to be considered human beings, IMHO.
A definition of human that applies to everyone, dignity aside? Any living entitiy that was created by human DNA. That applies to everything- fetus, comotose, the deranged, and the good.
Reply
That's probably what self-respect and respect of others is all about.
If dignity is defined by self-respect and respect of others, while there might be no dignity in the stopping of life functions, there can be dignity in how you act in the time leading up to that moment. So maybe not dignity in death, but dignity during the process of dying, if that makes sense.
The problem with saying somebody is too stupid or deranged to be considered human is the consequence of that verdict. I think that is where it becomes most important to have some sort of law preventing individual views to become judicial decisions.
Reply
I would also say it's too wide an assumption to say what the roots of human worth is in Christianity. The more research I do the more I see that from the death of Jesus Christianity has been splintered into very diverse groups with very different points of view.
Today many Christians, particularly in the U.S., look on people who refuse to convert as soulless sub-humans, while others see females or non-whites as less human than others. I think you need more defined parameters while keeping in mind that many other beliefs and religions have their own respect for human worth.
Reply
The created in God's image thing is one way to say that humans are different from any other living thing on the planet, and just through this have their own dignity that is not a result of what they do or what they own.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment