Because of these approaches and narratives, words such as tolerance and human dignity have become subjective and in some cases malleable. Contemporary culture views worth as shaped by our experiences, and my disagreement with your interpretation robs you of your dignity. This contradicts the Biblical understanding of humans having intrinsic value because we are formed in the image of…
In “Why Do Species Matter?”, Lilly-Marlene Russow argues that humans have a moral obligation to protect and to ensure the continued existence of things of aesthetic value which includes some but not necessarily all animals. In this paper, I will argue that the subjectivity involved in determining aesthetic value makes it an insufficient element for determining moral obligation to the protection and preservation of some animals.…
Humanity can be viewed and practiced in infinite ways, in fact most individuals see this concept differently as they have their own perception of what humanity is comprised of. Francis Fukuyama the author of “Human Dignity,” argues that human dignity is attained through a concept which he coined as Factor X. This term simply defines how a human being can attain dignity once he or she is stripped of their contingent and accidental characteristics. These characteristics include skin color, looks, social class and wealth, gender, sexual preference, cultural background as well as talents that we posses. The author tries to implement how we as human beings may learn to see each other without the superficial and materialistic characteristics we accumulate throughout our lifetime by seeing one another…
Now it must be admitted that human dignity is not an altogether clear notion. In what does it consist? Why should we think that all human life has it? The minute the Stoic tradition tries to answer such questions, problems arise. In particular, the answer almost always takes form of saying, Look at how far we are above the beasts. Reason, language, moral capacity – all these are seen as worth of respect and awe at least in part because the beasts, so-called, don’t have them, because they make us better than others (Nussbaum,…
In this essay I will cover the philosophy of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. I will begin by covering Kant perspective of rational beings and his idea of a priori learning. I will then move on to his idea of categorical imparaitive. After Kant I will discuss Mill’s utilitarian theory regarding pleasure and pain. With a better understanding of those I will move to Mill’s idea of a posteriori and hypothetical imperative. Following the ideas of these philosophers I will attempt to depict their viewpoints of the issue of animal cruelty through experimentation. To conclude the essay I will state my stance and who’s side, if either, I take in the animal cruelty controversy.…
To treat someone with dignity is to treat them as being of importance, in a way that is considerate of their diversity, as valued individuals. When dignity is present people feel in control, valued, confident, comfortable and able to make decisions for themselves.…
Dignity means the state or quality of being worthy of honour and respect. The first example is when Mariyam shows dignity when preparing for another tea for Mrs Smith. The second example is when Mariyam tells Mrs Smith that ‘I’d like you to feel free and tell me anything you like or dislike or if you have any concerns you’re more than, welcome to speak to me’. Dignity supports an individual by knowing what dignity is and know how to use dignity in the future.…
The difference between “right” and “wrong” is rarely plainly clear. Dozens of wars have been fought over the centuries that have been driven by differing moral beliefs. These rights, and actions motivated by them, are justified by a society’s collective morals, which begs the question- who decides what the collective belief of an entire society is? Some seem relatively clear—the right to life, the right to work—while others are significantly cloudier— how does my right to own property and freely express myself affect my neighbor’s right to have a safe, peaceful place to live? As the layers of these moral problems are uncovered we delve deeper into what rights are, and just as importantly, who has them and why? Philosopher Immanuel Kant’s believes that all persons have inherent value and he bases his view of human rights off of whether or not the person is capable of making moral judgments and having free will and reason. Just as it has been argued over time what exactly a right is, not all have agreed on who has a right and why they deserve it. Though Tom Regan gives much credit to the Kantian argument of value, he believes the ownership of rights goes slightly further- that it is not rationality that defines the ownership of rights, but rather being the “subject of a life”. Regan uses egalitarianism to argue that in order to believe that people have more inherent rights than animals would contradict the argument altogether because it would favor humans or Homo sapiens over other animals simply because of our species. This “speciesist” belief cannot be justified, Regan says, because it ignores the worth and inherent value of millions of subjects of lives.…
Many people believe there are only three basic needs of life, food, water and shelter. What most people might not realize is that humans have a very important psychological basic need - dignity. When you have nothing your dignity keeps you going. The author of “Unbroken”, Laura Hillenbrand explores the concept of dignity as a basic need. In “Unbroken” Louis Zamperini’s dignity fueled his battle to survive. When his dignity was compromised his will to live started to diminish. During his imprisonment, Louis begins to realized the role of dignity as an essential element of life. Dignity played a huge role in Louis’ prison life and after in his everyday life.…
According to the nonconsequentialist approach proposed by the German philosopher, Immanuel Kant, an action has moral worth if and if only, it stems from a sense of duty. Kantian ethics do not account for contingencies and possible consequences of actions. Moreover, the moral principles behind the actions must have universal applicability. In other words, it must be binding on all rational beings, irrespective of their personal desires and objectives. Another important dimension of Kant’s ethics disregards the treatment of humanity as a means to an end. Thus, Kant proposes that moral actions involve respecting humanity, both within and outside us (Shaw,…
Kant’s diagnoses the human condition as human’s frailty and impurity when distinguishing between one’s self interested inclinations and moral duty. Humans were “…finite beings with our individual needs…yet we [were] also rational beings, and for Kant that include[d]…the recognition of moral obligations” (Stevenson and Haberman p.155). The contrast and ever-apparent strain between these opposing sides of human nature fuel Kant’s diagnosis of human’s frailty. In Kant’s conception of human reason and action, he distinguished between categorical and hypothetical imperatives which displayed the human struggles regarding what decisions were morally right. Self interested desires, “…which involve[ed] only the selection of means to satisfy one’s own desire” (p.151) could be defined as a hypothetical imperative. However, categorical imperative claims “…that morality is fundamentally a function of [one’s] reason, not just [one’s] feelings” (p.151). Knowing what was morally right and doing what was morally right was the depravity of human nature, the choice of choosing one’s own happiness over their obligations to those who surround them. The desire for instant gratification from any action hinders human’s consideration of longer-term self-interest. The difficulty arises when the one must decide to postpone immediate satisfaction in the interest of future goals; a “…balance to strike between living for the moment and planning for the future….” (p.155) must be reached. Human’s struggles with moral decisions and personal gain exemplify their…
"Few formulas in philosophy have been so widely accepted and variously interpreted as Kant's injunction to treat humanity as an end in itself"(Hill, 38). Immanuel Kant's views, as elucidated in his book, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, are based on the belief that "people count" by prohibiting actions which exploit other individuals in order for self-prosperity or altruistic ends. Ethics then, are confirmed by the dignity and worth of the rational agency of each person. Since human beings are the only rational beings capable of decision making and reasonable judgement, humanity must be valued. Kant proposes a test that ensures that humanity is treated with respect, and not used merely as an instrument. To understand how he defines this test, we must first take a look at the foundation of his main principle, the Categorical Imperative.…
Very good job in your draft essay. You use very good point in your thesis. Your essay presents a strong challenge, which defines the effect that dignity is facing in our world. This is a clear argumentative situation against dignity. In my opinion, one weakness is the lack of a more persuasive point about your vision of dignity, despite the challenge.…
• A term used in moral, ethical, and political discussions to signify that a being has an innate right to respect and ethical treatment. It is an extension of Enlightenment-era beliefs that individuals have inherent, inviolable rights, and thus is closely related to concepts like virtue, respect, self-respect, autonomy, human rights, and enlightened reason.…
The moral worth of animals and non-person humans, as per Immanuel Kant’s differentiation of regular, rational humans with those who have mental “incapacities,” has been a long debate in ethics. If we were able to prove that animals and non-person humans have rational capacity, although different compared to persons, then these non-person beings might be given moral rights.…