Dignity its history and meaning

199 Pages·2018·0.797 MB·English

by  Rosen, Michael

DIGNITY

D I G N I T Y
Its History and Meaning
MICHAEL ROSEN
h a r v a r d u n i v e r s i t y p r e s s
Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, En gland
2012
Copyright © 2012 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data
Rosen, Michael, 1952–
Dignity : its history and meaning / Michael Rosen.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index.
ISBN 978- 0- 674- 06443- 0 (alk. paper)
1. Dignity. 2. Respect for persons. I. Title.
BJ1533.R42R67 2012
179.7—dc23 2011032502
For Nancy Rosenblum
With affection, gratitude, and respect

CONTENTS
Preface ix
References and Abbreviations xix
1. “The Shibboleth of All Empty- Headed
Moralists” 1
I. Humbug? 1
II. Cicero and After 11
III. Kant 19
IV. Grace and Dignity 31
V. Dignity and Equality 38
VI. Hierarchy 47
VII. Respect for Rights and the Right to
Respect 54
2. The Legislation of Dignity 63
I. Dwarves with Dignity 63
II. Germany 77
III. The Kantian Background: The Formula
of Humanity 80
IV. Catholicism and the Grundgesetz 90
contents
viii
V. Interpreting the Grundgesetz 100
VI. Daschner and the Air Safety Law 104
VII. Is There a Consistent Interpretation? 107
VIII. Voluntarism 119
IX. Conclusion 125
3. Duty to Humanity 129
I. Humanism 129
II. A Utilitarian Response 131
III. Externalism 133
IV. Non-Human Things May Be
Intrinsically Good 135
V. Duty 138
VI. Kant 142
VII. Duty without Platonism 156
Notes 163
Index 169
PREFACE
“So tell me,” my friend Christopher McCrudden, the dis-
tinguished human rights lawyer, said one day over coffee,
“what do phi los o phers have to say about ‘dignity’?” I had
read the novels of C. P. Snow and Michael Innes, and I
always imagined that the air of Oxford Sen ior Common
Rooms would be crackling with interdisciplinary ex-
changes. But, alas, if that kind of thing was going on, it
had not been coming my way. So h ere was my chance! I
must admit, though, that our conversation did not get off
to the best start: “Er, not very much that I know about—
Kant perhaps?” I replied.
Fortunately, Christopher proved a pers ist ent (as well as
tolerant) questioner, and the results of my further think-
ing (including many more conversations with him) are
now in your hands. But before I thank those who helped
to shape and correct my ideas, let me say something about
the way that this book is presented.
It is often said that philosophy these days is not acces-
sible to the general reader. This is obviously a matter for
regret. If it is important that an educated person should