{"id":246,"date":"2016-05-07T20:21:59","date_gmt":"2016-05-07T20:21:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/?p=246"},"modified":"2016-06-08T12:24:50","modified_gmt":"2016-06-08T12:24:50","slug":"dignity-qua-human-being-or-dignity-qua-persona","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/2016\/05\/07\/dignity-qua-human-being-or-dignity-qua-persona\/","title":{"rendered":"Dignity qua human being or Dignity qua persona?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Dignity is the condition but also the consequence of human rights (article 22 UDHR).<br \/>\nBut what exactly is dignity? The intuitive definition of dignity would be \u201cworthy of respect\u201d\u2026 but why is one \u201cworthy of respect\u201d? Then again, the natural answer would be \u201cbecause he or she is a human being\u201d.<br \/>\nHowever, Alain Supiot\u2019s \u201dThe Human being as Imago Dei\u201d seems to offer a different perspective. Indeed, in this chapter, we understand that the notion of personality finds its origins in Ancient Rome and initially meant \u201cthe death masks of the ancestors\u201d, the imago. It is only later, with the Humanist\/Enlightenment surge that the concept of \u201cpersonality\u201d was progressively bestowed upon every human being as a result of the King ceasing to be the only incarnation of God on Earth. From then on, all human beings were to be equals \u2013 because all made in the image of God- and unique- because God is one. Therefore, all human beings were to have \u201cdignity\u201d.<br \/>\nWhat it means is that human beings have dignity because they wear the mask of their ancestor, the mask of God. They do not hold dignity qua human being but qua persona, qua Imago Dei; because they represent God on Earth. More importantly perhaps, human beings have dignity because they represent the Christian God. Following the Modern era, law, Supiot argues, has become \u201cthe authority that vouches for human identity and symbolizes that they are not to be treated like a thing\u201d. However, despite the apparent objectivity the Law claims to have, scholars, such as Anthony Angie, have also made evident the links between Christianity, natural law and positive law and revealed the embedded eurocentrism of modern international law.<br \/>\nThis account of the Christian origins of the concept of dignity is at odds with its traditional understanding and raises issues with regard to the universal project of human rights. I am by no means implying that not all human beings must have their dignity respected. My interrogation rather lies in the consequences that such a conceptualization of dignity can have when applied universally: the refugees\u2019 crisis, treatment of indigenous populations in land eviction cases\u2026. How, if at all, does a Christian-western concept of dignity impact on how the Law understands the dignity of others?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Dignity is the condition but also the consequence of human rights (article 22 UDHR). But what exactly is dignity? The intuitive definition of dignity would be \u201cworthy of respect\u201d\u2026 but why is one \u201cworthy of respect\u201d? Then again, the natural answer would be \u201cbecause he or she is a human being\u201d. However, Alain Supiot\u2019s \u201dThe [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":40976,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[136349],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/40976"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=246"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":252,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246\/revisions\/252"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=246"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=246"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/lawandthehumanities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=246"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}