General all-inclusive perspectives on dignity for all of mankind with a comment as to the possible degradation of dignity by way of masking.
Date: 9/21/2020 9:07:19 AM ( 15 mon ) ... viewed 1022 times
March 11, 2021 - The "Shot" Has Been Fired For The Greatest War -
"... we do not just face a war on freedom. This time we face a war on human beings, and on all that makes us human."*
March 6, 2021 -
"Masks break human beings’ ability to bond face to face and enjoy human contact, smiles and jokes. Masks turn down the effectiveness of human 'technology,' essentially, by making it hard for us to 'read' each other and to pick up social cues."
March 4, 2021 - "Freedom Face Mask" Is an Oxymoron!
I offer an additional note regarding mask-wearing. Here is a quote by Richard Rudd (in "The Art of Contemplation"): "breath is equivalent to freedom". With this in mind it is obvious that mask-wearing inhibits the individual's freedom. From this perspective the idea of a "freedom face mask" is an oxymoron! Yet these are on the market now and they are "Ethically Made For Dignity" (LOL!)
February 4,2021 -
COVID: If there is no virus, why are people dying? by Jon Rappoport -
Since the beginning of this false pandemic, I’ve been offering compelling evidence that no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists.
Then people ask, “So why are all these people dying?”
I have explained that, many times, and in this article I’ll explain it again.
First of all, the whole notion that COVID-19 is one health condition is a lie. COVID IS NOT ONE THING.
This is both the hardest and simplest point to accept and understand.
Don’t reject the existence of the virus and then say, “So what is THE cause of people dying?” There is no ONE CAUSE. There is no one illness. There is no “it.”
By far, the biggest sources of illness we are dealing with are lung conditions: various kinds of pneumonia; flu and flu-like disease; TB; other unnamed lung/respiratory problems.
THESE ARE BEING RELABELED “COVID.” It’s a repackaging scheme. People are dying for those traditional reasons, and their deaths are being called “COVID.”
Thus, the old is artificially made new. It’s still old.
In this wide-ranging group of people who have traditional lung conditions, by far the largest component is the elderly and frail.
They are dying in nursing homes, in hospitals, in their houses and apartments. In addition to their lung problems, they have been suffering from a whole host of other conditions, for a long time, and they’ve been treated with toxic drugs.
They’re terrified that they might receive a diagnosis of “COVID,” and then they are given that diagnosis. THEN they’re isolated, cut off from friends and family. They give up and die.
This is forced premature death.
Some of these elderly and frail people are heavily sedated and put on breathing ventilators—which is a killing treatment. In a large New York study, it was discovered that patients over the age of 64, who were put on ventilators, died 97.2 % of the time. Staggering.
Some of these elderly and frail patients are now dying from reactions to the COVID vaccine—and of course, their deaths are listed as “COVID.”
Why else are people dying? In many cases, it’s a simple matter of bookkeeping. They die in hospitals for a variety of reasons, and staff write “COVID death” on their files. In the US, states receive federal money based on these statistics.
Let’s say that, in certain places around the world, there are clusters of deaths (being called COVID) that can’t be explained in the ways I’ve just described.
In those situations, you would have to examine EACH situation closely. For example, just prior to an outbreak in Northern Italy, was there a vaccination campaign? What was in the vaccine? A new breed of toxic substances?
You have to consider each cluster independently.
Getting the picture?
None of the “COVID deaths” anywhere in the world requires the existence of a new virus.
For instance, in Wuhan, where the whole business began, the first “COVID” cases of pneumonia occurred in a city whose air is HEAVILY polluted. In China, every year, roughly 300,000 people die from pneumonia. That means millions of cases. None of those deaths need to be explained by invoking a new virus.
Now, add to all this the fact that the PCR test for the virus is irreparably flawed and useless (for a variety of reasons I’ve explained in other articles). The test spits out false-positives like a fire hose. Thus, the high case numbers. If the authorities have to go to such extremes to paint a picture of a spreading viral epidemic…
There is no evidence that an actual germ is traveling around the world felling people. The “evidence” is invented.
The “pandemic” is invented.
The fraud is promoted.
During these fake epidemics (there have been many), someone will say: “But my neighbor’s son, who was very healthy, died suddenly. It must be the virus.”
No. People who appear to be healthy do die. Not just today, but going back in history as far as you want to go. No one has an explanation. They might have an explanation if they looked very closely, but they don’t look closely.
Favoring the “virus explanation” is a bias, a knee-jerk reaction, a response to propaganda.
If you think there must be other major reasons to explain “why all these people are dying,” keep in mind that “lung conditions” is a category that expands all over the globe. For instance, there are about one BILLION cases of flu-like illness EVERY YEAR on planet Earth.
Repackaging/relabeling just a small percentage of those cases alone would account for all official COVID death numbers.
What’s new about COVID is the STORY. That’s what’s being sold: a STORY about a virus.
Reprinted with permission from Jon Rappoport’s
January 24, 2021 - "CCD Claims 427,000 USA 'COVID Deaths' -
However, No Flu Cases
How Dumb Do They Think We Are?"
January 2, 2021 - Stefan Lanka dismantles modern virus theory -
"Terrain Model Refutes Germ Theory" -
Here are five good documents by Dr Stefan Lanka to read if you want to understand the problems and fraud within "virology" and why people like myself do not believe in the existence of "viruses".
“The Virus Misconception Part 1 – Measles as an example” – by Dr Stefan Lanka
PDF (same doc)
“The Virus Misconception Part 2 – The beginning and end of the corona crisis” – by Dr Stefan Lanka
PDF (same doc)
"The Misinterpretation of the Antibodies" with Dr Stefan Lanka
PDF - (same doc) Translated and edited by Northern Tracey and John Blaid
From German article https://telegra.ph/Die-Fehldeutung-der-Antikörper-07-12
Dr Stefan Lanka Interview July 2020 - "Virologist", molecular and marine biologist. All claims of "virus" existence refuted.
PDF (same doc)
How Dead Are Viruses Anyway?
Dr Stefan Lanka, molecular and marine biologist
All claims of Virus Existence Refuted
[Unofficial English translation of Die Wurzel’s interview with Stefan Lanka in July 2020
https://www.die-wurzel.de reproduced with permission
"No Panic - Dr Stefan Lanka on Bird Flu, AIDS and the Corruption of Medicine"
PDF (same doc) - Feb 24, 2006
Thanksgiving Day 2020 -
"There are over 200 known and separate strains of coronavirus, which is associated with influenza, otherwise known as a common cold.
The specific variety from which the still-unidentifiable and un-isolated Covid-19 virus purportedly derives is patented by the British Pirbright Institute and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Oh, go figure. Again.
Meantime, many Americans are just now waking up to the following facts:
1. The CDC and NIH are not government institutions. Both are private entities that are in the business of producing and profiting from vaccines. Both compete for government contracts to carry out research and do statistical analysis, but they are not part of the government.
2. There is no provision in any Federal or State-of-State Constitution authorizing any government official to mandate anything at all about our health or medical options. Their only power is over their own employees and dependents as a condition of employment or of receiving benefits.
3. Forced vaccination is banned under the Nuremberg Code, Article 6, Sections 1 and 3, and anyone involved in a forced vaccination program is liable.
4. There is nobody responsible for harm caused by a vaccine. The pharmaceutical companies have been off the hook since the 1980's and the governmental services corporations that accepted the liability for them are bankrupt. There remains an industry-funded 'Vaccine Court' but it has a reputation for protecting the industry.
5. Pushing any form of mask mandate or forced vaccination program on the General Public under color of law is a crime of constructive fraud.
6. Any publicly organized corporation (holding a charter or articles of incorporation from the United States Government or from any State-of-State franchise) is obligated to obey the Public Law, including the Constitutions, and cannot assume rights or authorities depriving any member of the General Public of any right guaranteed by the Constitutions or Public Laws -- including the right of privacy, religious freedom, and self-determination.
7. 'My body, my choice.' applies to more than just abortions.
8. If someone doesn't have the right to make you brush your teeth, they don't have the right to make you stay home and wear a mask. Contrary to what some people and corporations have been assuming, we don't live in a Nanny State."
November 5, 2020 - Comments By An Osteopathic Physician -
"... I see people suffering around me on many levels. I see the devastation that the Covid phenomenon has caused. I am extremely disappointed that the most important reasons people are sick are being ignored. These reasons include the continued electrification of our planet and the ubiquitous toxins that we are inundated with. And the approach taken in the name of protection has amplified the fear and alienation that are so destructive to the social beings that we are. People are staying inside on their devices and putting themselves at exponentially higher risk.
I highly recommend that you follow Dr. Tom Cowan, MD. He is writing and speaking out with some very important ideas. And Dr. Jack Kruse, MD. Both of these brilliant doctors are thinking outside the box."
November 2, 2020 - "The Rise in Infections Among Mask Wearers Today" -
In 2008, Dr. Fauci co-wrote a paper with two colleagues explaining that influenza was not the predominant cause of death during the 1918 flu pandemic. This video explains that the rise in infections among mask wearers today matches the real killer in 1918. Bacterial Pneumonia deaths caused by wearing masks.
DEATH BY MASK: MASK WEARING, BACTERIAL PNEUMONIA INFECTIONS, AND THE 1918 FLU:
November 1, 2020 - "The NIH and CDC Are Not Public Institutions" - By Anna Von Reitz
Once and for all, people, wise up and wake up.
The NIH and CDC are not public institutions. They are "federal" in the same sense as Federal Express or the Federal Reserve. They are private incorporated organizations in the business of making, evaluating, and selling vaccines. They also perform under some "government" contracts to do research, collect and analyze statistical data, etc., so that they are subcontractors of our Subcontractors of our Subcontractors.
Like the FBI and DHS and FEMA and BATF and IRS, they are three layers down in the layers of unauthorized secondary "federal" subcontractors and they have less than no authority related to you.
It's like having an employee at Wendy's Hamburgers come out on the street and demand that you wear a mask because they've got the flu. And if you obey that order, then they have reasonable grounds to assume that you owed them that obedience, don't they?
But as the "government" involved in contracting for services from the CDC and NIH is simply another, larger, foreign, for-profit commercial corporation engaged in the business of providing governmental services, and as there are no provisions allowing any of these bounders to infringe upon our rights and prerogatives in the name of public health -- which is not the same as or even part of "public welfare" -- they all need to be stood down by the actual people of this country.
You are all playing with phantoms--- THINGS like boogey men that don't actually exist, except on paper--- a charter granted to them via the use and too often, the abuse of, your own delegated powers.
You are letting yourselves be bossed around by Subcontractors of Subcontractors of Subcontractors, and instead of telling your direct Subcontractors where to get off, you are scuttling around obeying improper demands posed by the employees of Employees of your Employees.
The NIH and CDC have no authority related to you, and to the extent that some other government subcontractors believe whatever the NIH or CDC may say, their beliefs and their actions are completely immaterial.
Government subcontractors don't own this country, and they are being informed of this fact daily by Americans who know who they are. Get on your hind legs and go to: http://www.theamericanstatesassembly.net to learn more.
Also remember that the juicy good stuff is no longer being posted on Facebook due to illegal censorship. Go to: http://www.annavonreitz.com for all the latest.
October 6, 2020 - Final Words on Masks -
"We have to stop that deadly virus that is so incredibly virulent that, according to the CDC, 99.8% of those exposed to it survive. Wear your masks is the order of the day, but along the way, many, including the Surgeon General of the United States, have said it is a waste of time.
That did not stop Germany from becoming the first country to impose a fine on all non-mask wearers. Chancellor Angela Merkel announced during a virtual meeting in September with state governors that almost the entire country will be under a 50 euros minimum ($59) fine for breaching the national mask mandate.
The use of face masks has become a highly politicized issue throughout the pandemic, with some individuals claiming that wearing a mask can negatively impact a person’s breathing and put their health at risk. Others say it is a useless barrier that lets viral particles in and out with ease. Regardless, the central authorities in our world want you and your children to wear one.
Running, walking, or even socializing outside is not the cause of the vast majority of
coronavirus outbreaks, regardless of mask usage.
Health officials have gone back and forth on masks, but in general, they like to assure the public that face coverings can safely and effectively prevent the spread of COVID-19 respiratory droplets. Now, in what might be seen as a desperate move, they are promoting their safety with a study that assesses the changes in oxygen and carbon dioxide levels trying to put the best face on the dangers of mask-wearing.
In this study, researchers compared the breathing of each individual before and after wearing a surgical mask for thirty minutes that included a six-minute walking test. At the mark and 30 minutes after the walk, researchers found no significant changes in oxygen saturation or carbon dioxide levels.
This study might fool part of the public, but there are other studies that suggest N95 masks can cause significant hypoxia and hypercapnia that resulted in reductions in blood oxygen. In one study, researchers examined the blood oxygen levels in 53 surgeons using an oximeter. They measured blood oxygenation before surgery as well as at the end of surgeries.4 The researchers found that the mask reduced the blood oxygen levels (pa02) significantly. The longer the duration of wearing the mask, the greater the fall in blood oxygen levels. It is interesting that the present study only went on for 30 minutes.
By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain.
'Do your part. Wear a mask.' The Centers for Disease Control has recommended as much since April. But in the months since, the cloth coverings that muffle voice and fog glasses and soak sweat and serve as a general annoyance have become a part of pandemic politics when it is a medical issue. Politicians might as well be weighing in on quantum mechanics. It is important to note that until recently, the CDC did not recommend wearing a face mask or covering of any kind unless a person was known to be infected.
There is a difference between the N95 respirator mask and the surgical mask (cloth or paper mask) in terms of side effects. The N95 mask, which filters out 95% of particles with a median diameter >0.3 µm2, impairs respiratory exchange (breathing) to a greater degree than a soft mask and is more often associated with headaches. In one such study, researchers surveyed 212 healthcare workers (47 males and 165 females) asking about headaches with N95 mask use, duration of the headaches, type of headaches, and if the person had preexisting headaches.
The pore size of cloth face coverings ranges from ~ 20-100 microns. The COVID virus is 200-1000x smaller than that, at 0.1 microns. Putting up a chain-link fence will not keep out a mosquito. Even the most esteemed medical journals admit their purpose is to calm anxiety. '"Expanded masking protocols" greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety,' writes Dr. Simonie Gold.
Unfortunately, no one is telling the frail elderly and those with lung diseases, such as COPD, emphysema, or pulmonary fibrosis, of these dangers when wearing a facial mask of any kind—which can cause a severe worsening of lung function. This also includes lung cancer patients and people having had lung surgery, especially with partial resection or even the removal of a whole lung.
Decreasing the amount of oxygen people are breathing, by forcing people to wear masks, is not such a good idea. Under the mask, O2 readings drop from a regular 21 to an unhealthy 17.5, ringing the alarm of the official OSHA devices that measure such things.
The usual amount of CO2 in the air is approximately 400 ppm, when measured around the nose of mouth, would be higher. But wear a mask and concentrations shoot up to 5,000. This is not healthy. Carbon dioxide in the air we breathe usually is at 0.0390 percent. When we breathe out, it is 4.0 percent.
The minimum oxygen concentration in the air required for human breathing is 19.5 percent. Approximately 78 percent of the air we breathe is nitrogen gas, while only about 20.9 percent is oxygen. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, OSHA, determined the optimal range of oxygen in the air for humans runs between 19.5 and 23.5 percent.
The importance of these findings is that a drop in oxygen levels (hypoxia) is associated with an impairment in immunity. Studies have shown that hypoxia can inhibit the type of main immune cells used to fight viral infections called the CD4+ T-lymphocyte. This occurs because the hypoxia increases the level of a compound called hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1), which inhibits T-lymphocytes and stimulates a powerful immune inhibitor cell called the Tregs.
People with cancer, especially if cancer has spread, will be at further risk from prolonged hypoxia as cancer grows best in a microenvironment that is low in oxygen. Low oxygen also promotes inflammation, which can promote the growth, invasion, and spread of cancers. Repeated episodes of hypoxia has been proposed as a significant factor in atherosclerosis and hence increases all cardiovascular (heart attacks) and cerebrovascular (strokes) diseases.
I wonder what the Surgeon General had to say about facemasks. Does it matter?
'Florida Sheriff Orders Deputies & Staff NOT to Wear Face Masks,' reads the headline. 'Marion County Sheriff Billy sent an email Tuesday informing the 900 people working in the department that “when you are on-duty/working as my employee and representing my Office – masks will not be worn,”' the Ocala Star-Banner reports.
Here’s what Dr. Fauci says: 'There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better, and it might even block a droplet, but it is not providing the perfect protection that people "think" that it is. And often, there are unintended consequences: People keep fiddling with the mask, and they keep touching their face.'
Government officials in the Netherlands will not ask citizens to wear masks, as they say, there is no clear evidence that doing so would slow the spread of the coronavirus. Instead of mandating facial coverings, the country will seek a solution that includes more physical distancing. 'Because from a medical perspective there is no proven effectiveness of masks, the Cabinet has decided that there will be no national obligation for wearing non-medical masks,' Dutch Minister for Medical Care Tamara van Ark said.
As America waits for a COVID-19 vaccine, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s director Robert Redfield said we all might be better protected by simply continuing to wear masks. 'I might even go so far as to say that this face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine,' said Redfield, in testimony given to the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Do Your Part. Wear A Mask?
(Vadim Kluchnik Dreamstime.com)
James Grundvig says the masks are the Swiss Army knife of the architects’ tool box; 1. They control people and make them subservient. 2. They allow AI face recognition software to identify people with masks on and off; 3. They prevent full communication using facial expressions.
Dr. Russell Blaylock warns that not only do face masks fail to protect the healthy from getting sick, but they also create serious health risks to the wearer. The bottom line is that if you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask.
The end goal of masks is to make you fall in line and to roll up your sleeves in the biggest biological experiment in history.
Dr. Russell Blaylock
'As for the scientific support for the use of face mask, a recent careful examination of the literature, in which 17 of the best studies were analyzed, concluded that, "None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection." Keep in mind; no studies have been done to demonstrate that either a cloth mask or the N95 mask has any effect on the transmission of the COVID-19 virus. Any recommendations, therefore, have to be based on studies of influenza virus transmission. And, as you have seen, there is no conclusive evidence of their efficiency in controlling flu virus transmission,' concludes Blaylock.
Gary D. Barnett, writing about how the beauty of life is being destroyed by lockdowns and masks says, 'All of this ugly absurdity now exists, but the most beautiful thing in life is also being destroyed before our eyes. That is the beauty of love and caring. It was once said that “love is a many splendored thing," and that may be an understatement, as what more defines the human spirit than love? Today, people are wearing harmful and useless masks; they are told not to get close to any other; they are voluntarily, for the most part locking themselves inside home prisons and are not even allowed to work or be with co-workers. People are becoming unrecognizable zombies, frightened of all strangers, friends, and even family. Romance and passion are shunned and in some parts of the world forbidden due to this virus hoax, so many have acquiesced to this travesty, and now most all communication is via a cold and impersonal computer screen. The idea of a robotic humanity without feeling now seems possible, and is even being promoted; and in some parts of the world, it is being actively sought. This insanity is no longer science fiction, but is on the verge of reality. No good can come from this horror.'”
September 21, 2020 -
Dignity is the right of a person to be valued and respected for their own sake, and to be treated ethically. It is of significance in morality, ethics, law and politics as an extension of the Enlightenment-era concepts of inherent, (u)nalienable rights. The term may also be used to describe personal conduct, as in "behaving with dignity".
2 Modern use
4 Philosophical history
4.1 Pico della Mirandola
4.3 Mortimer Adler and Alan Gewirth
6 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
7.1 International bodies
7.7 United States
8.2 European Union
8.7 South Africa
9 See also
11 Further reading
12 External links
The English word "dignity", attested from the early 13th century, comes from Latin dignitas (worthiness) by way of French dignité.
English-speakers often use the word "dignity" in prescriptive and cautionary ways: for example, in politics it can be used to critique the treatment of oppressed and vulnerable groups and peoples, but it has also been applied to cultures and sub-cultures, to religious beliefs and ideals, and even to animals used for food or research.
"Dignity" also has descriptive meanings pertaining to the worth of human beings. In general, the term has various functions and meanings depending on how the term is used and on the context.
In ordinary modern usage, the word denotes "respect" and "status", and it is often 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. There is also a long history of special philosophical use of this term. However, it is rarely defined outright in political, legal, and scientific discussions. International proclamations have thus far left dignity undefined, and scientific commentators, such as those arguing against genetic research and algeny, cite dignity as a reason but are ambiguous about its application.
Human dignity can be violated in multiple ways. The main categories of violations are:
Violations of human dignity in terms of humiliation refer to acts that humiliate or diminish the self-worth of a person or a group. Acts of humiliation are context dependent but we normally have an intuitive understanding where such a violation occurs. As Schachter noted, “it has been generally assumed that a violation of human dignity can be recognized even if the abstract term cannot be defined. ‘I know it when I see it even if I cannot tell you what it is’”. More generally, etymology of the word “humiliation” has a universal characteristic in the sense that in all languages the word involves “downward spatial orientation” in which “something or someone is pushed down and forcefully held there”. This approach is common in judicial decisions where judges refer to violations of human dignity as injuries to people's self-worth or their self-esteem.[
Instrumentalization or objectification
This aspect refers to treating a person as an instrument or as means to achieve some other goal. This approach builds on Immanuel Kant's moral imperative stipulating that we should treat people as ends or goals in themselves, namely as having ultimate moral worth which should not be instrumentalized.
Violations of human dignity as degradation refer to acts that degrade the value of human beings. These are acts that, even if done by consent, convey a message that diminishes the importance or value of all human beings. They consist of practices and acts that modern society generally considers unacceptable for human beings, regardless of whether subjective humiliation is involved, such as selling oneself to slavery, or when a state authority deliberately puts prisoners in inhuman living conditions.
Comment regarding "slavery" and "Violations of human dignity as degradation" in the above quote: Slaves (as well as women in some countries who are granted equality with men) have been masked. Is the present-day masking of humanity degrading to our dignity? .........
These are acts that strip a person or a group of their human characteristics. It may involve describing or treating them as animals or as a lower type of human beings. This has occurred in genocides such as the Holocaust and in Rwanda where the minority were compared to insects.
Some of the practices that violate human dignity include torture, rape, social exclusion, labor exploitation, bonded labor, and slavery.
Both absolute and relative poverty are violations of human dignity, although they also have other significant dimensions, such as social injustice. Absolute poverty is associated with overt exploitation and connected to humiliation (for example, being forced to eat food from other people's garbage), but being dependent upon others to stay alive is a violation of dignity even in the absence of more direct violations. Relative poverty, on the other hand, is a violation because the cumulative experience of not being able to afford the same clothes, entertainment, social events, education, or other features of typical life in that society results in subtle humiliation; social rejection; marginalization; and consequently, a diminished self-respect.
Another example of violation of human dignity, especially for women in developing countries, is lack of sanitation. Having no access to toilets leaves currently about 1 billion people of the world with no choice other than to defecation in the open, which has been declared by the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations as an affront to personal dignity. Human dignity is also violated by the practice of employing people in India for "manual scavenging" of human excreta from unsanitary toilets – usually by people of a lower caste, and more often by women than men.
A further example of violation of human dignity, affecting women mainly in developing countries, is female genital mutilation (FGM).
The movie The Magic Christian depicts a wealthy man (Peter Sellers) and his son (Ringo Starr) who test the limits of dignity by forcing people to perform self-degrading acts for money. The Simpsons episode "Homer vs. Dignity" has a similar plot.
Pico della Mirandola
A philosopher of the Renaissance, Pico della Mirandola, granted dignity to ideas and to beings. In his "Oration on the Dignity of Man", he told hostile clerics about the dignity of the liberal arts and about the dignity and the glory of angels. His comments implied the dignity of philosophers. This oration is commonly seen as one of the central texts of the Renaissance, intimately tied with the growth of humanist philosophies.
A philosopher of the Age of Enlightenment (18th century), Immanuel Kant 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."
Specifically with respect to human dignity, which his writings brought from relative obscurity in Western philosophy into a focal point for philosophers, Kant held that "free will" is essential; human dignity is related to human agency, the ability of humans to choose their own actions.
Mortimer Adler and Alan Gewirth
Philosophers of the late 20th century who have written significant works on the subject of dignity include Mortimer Adler and Alan Gewirth. Gewirth's views on human dignity are typically compared and contrasted with Kant's, for like Kant he theorizes that human dignity arises from agency. But while sharing Kant's view that rights arise from dignity, Gewirth focused far more than Kant on the positive obligations that dignity imposed on humans, the moral requirement not only to avoid harming but to actively assist one another in achieving and maintaining a state of "well being".
Among other topics, including the dignity of labor, Adler extensively explored the question of human equality and equal right to dignity. According to Adler, the question of whether humans have equal right to dignity is intrinsically bound in the question of whether human beings are truly equal, which itself is bound in the question of whether human beings are a distinct class from all things, including animals, or vary from other things only by degree. Adler wrote that the only sense in which it is true that all human beings are equal is that they are equally distinct from animals. "The dignity of man," he said, "is the dignity of the human being as a person—a dignity that is not possessed by things." To Adler, failure to recognize the distinction challenged the right of humans to equal dignity and equal treatment.
Dan Egonsson, followed by Roger Wertheimer, argued that while it is conventional for people to equate dignity with 'being human' (Egonsson's 'Standard Attitude', Wertheimer's 'Standard Belief'), people generally also import something other than mere humanness to their idea of dignity. Egonsson suggested that an entity must be both human and alive to merit an ascription of dignity, while Wertheimer states "it is not a definitional truth that human beings have human status."
According to Arthur Schopenhauer, dignity is opinion of others about our worth and subjective definition of dignity is our fear from this opinion of others.
More recently, Philippe-André Rodriguez has argued that human dignity is best understood as an essentially contested concept. As he argues, "it seems that it is this very nature of the concept that has allowed, on the one hand, human rights to receive such international acceptance as a theoretical enterprise and, on the other hand, has led the concept to be constantly challenged by different cultures worldwide."
Human dignity is a central consideration of Christian philosophy The Catechism of the Catholic Church insists the "dignity of the human person is rooted in his or her creation in the image and likeness of God." "All human beings," says the Church, "in as much as they are created in the image of God, have the dignity of a person." The catechism says, "The right to the exercise of freedom belongs to everyone because it is inseparable from his or her dignity as a human person." The Catholic Church's view of human dignity is like Kant's insofar as it springs from human agency and free will, with the further understanding that free will in turn springs from human creation in the image of God.
Human dignity, or kevod ha-beriyot, is also a central consideration of Judaism. Talmud cautions against giving charity publicly rather than in private to avoid offending the dignity of the recipient. Medieval Jewish philosopher Maimonides in his codification of Halakha cautioned judges to preserve the self-respect of people who came before them: "Let not human dignity be light in his eyes; for the respect due to man supersedes a negative rabbinical command".
An Islamic view of dignity is crystallized in the Quran through the selected biographies of Noah, Abraham, Joseph, David, Moses, Mary, Jesus and others (differing from the narratives in the Bible, which the Quran claims were corrupted). Individuals such as these are presented as role-models of dignity because they did not abandon their self-respect by bowing to social pressures. When faced with the fear of disapproval, poverty, hunger, death etc. these individuals held firm in their sense of right and wrong, which was in-line with Divine ordinances. "The right course is that on which one keeps his attitudes, ambitions and requirements subjected to the Divine Laws; and in this way leads a balanced and graceful life. Such a person has grasped the most trustworthy support which will never fail him" (Quran 31:22) Such individuals are given the title of Muhsineen, who faced immense pressures but held firm in their positive actions. God awarded these individuals with authority and status in the land, and this reward is open to anyone who proves themselves worthy: "We bestow such honour and position on all those who lead their lives according to Our Laws." (Quran 37:80) Those who fall into this category are also afforded Divine protection from their mistakes: "Therefore We have saved you and your son from this. We have done so because We keep those who lead their lives according to Divine guidance safe from such mishaps." (37:104-105) The Quranic State that Muhammad began in Medinah sought to protect human dignity, since in a Quranic Welfare State individuals are free to work and live without the pressures faced by the threat of poverty, and thus can obey God's Laws as free individuals, contributing as part of a unified brotherhood working towards achieving humanity's full potential. Elaborations on dignity have been made by many scholars of Islam, such as Mohammad-Ali Taskhiri, head of the Islamic Culture and Communications Organization in Iran, in 1994. According to Taskhiri, dignity is a state to which all humans have equal potential, but which can only be actualized by living a life pleasing to the eyes of God. This is in keeping with the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which states that "True faith is the guarantee for enhancing such [basic human] dignity along the path to human perfection".
Human dignity is considered as Buddhahood in Mahayana Buddhism in which it is rooted in the idea that we are able to choose the path of self-perfection as a human being.
United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
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.
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.
— Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 1 and 2
In the 20th century, dignity became an issue for physicians and medical researchers. It has been invoked in questions of the bioethics of human genetic engineering, human cloning, and end-of-life care (particularly in such situations as the Terri Schiavo case, a controversial situation in which life support was withdrawn from a woman diagnosed in a persistent vegetative state).
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 recognizing 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."
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."
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."
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."
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'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."
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."
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 . . . .
(See 4th paragraph of "Ready007November 1, 2020 at 11:03 PM" under "Comments".)
Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites!Print this page
Email this page