Examining the criteria of human dignity.

IF 0.9 Q3 MEDICAL ETHICS Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine Pub Date : 2023-12-30 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.18502/jmehm.v16i14.14613
Seyed Abdosaleh Jafari, Behin Araminia, Hanieh Tavasoli, Nafiseh Tavasoli, Soheil Abedi, Ahmad Fayaz Bakhshe
{"title":"Examining the criteria of human dignity.","authors":"Seyed Abdosaleh Jafari, Behin Araminia, Hanieh Tavasoli, Nafiseh Tavasoli, Soheil Abedi, Ahmad Fayaz Bakhshe","doi":"10.18502/jmehm.v16i14.14613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>One of the critical aspects in discussing human dignity is the establishment of its criterion, a standard unique to humans. This criterion should effectively create a fundamental and structural distinction from other creatures. Initially, our focus was on the endeavors of biologists to differentiate the human species from others, emphasizing the physical aspects. However, physical and genetic differences lack the necessary characteristics to serve as a criterion for dignity. Subsequently, we explored the notion of this criterion in human behavior. Yet, given that behavior stems from human thought, it proves unsuitable as a criterion for dignity. Thus, our quest led us to explore human wisdom. However, since wisdom, like other abilities, serves as a tool for improved living and is present to some extent in other animals, it proves inadequate as a criterion. We have determined that the distinguishing characteristic lies in the power of choice or free will, setting humans apart from other living beings whose behavior is solely instinctual or driven by needs. Consequently, free choice forms the foundation of dignity, assigning value to the chooser based on the choices made.</p>","PeriodicalId":45276,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine","volume":"16 ","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10909333/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jmehm.v16i14.14613","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One of the critical aspects in discussing human dignity is the establishment of its criterion, a standard unique to humans. This criterion should effectively create a fundamental and structural distinction from other creatures. Initially, our focus was on the endeavors of biologists to differentiate the human species from others, emphasizing the physical aspects. However, physical and genetic differences lack the necessary characteristics to serve as a criterion for dignity. Subsequently, we explored the notion of this criterion in human behavior. Yet, given that behavior stems from human thought, it proves unsuitable as a criterion for dignity. Thus, our quest led us to explore human wisdom. However, since wisdom, like other abilities, serves as a tool for improved living and is present to some extent in other animals, it proves inadequate as a criterion. We have determined that the distinguishing characteristic lies in the power of choice or free will, setting humans apart from other living beings whose behavior is solely instinctual or driven by needs. Consequently, free choice forms the foundation of dignity, assigning value to the chooser based on the choices made.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
审查人类尊严的标准。
讨论人类尊严的一个关键方面是确立其标准,即人类独有的标准。这一标准应有效地从根本上和结构上区别于其他生物。最初,我们关注的焦点是生物学家将人类与其他物种区分开来的努力,强调的是生理方面。然而,生理和基因差异缺乏作为尊严标准的必要特征。随后,我们探讨了人类行为中的这一标准概念。然而,鉴于行为源于人类的思想,它被证明不适合作为尊严的标准。于是,我们开始探索人类的智慧。然而,由于智慧和其他能力一样,都是改善生活的工具,而且在某种程度上也存在于其他动物身上,因此证明它不足以作为一种标准。我们认为,人类的显著特征在于选择或自由意志的能力,这使人类有别于其他行为完全出于本能或受需求驱使的生物。因此,自由选择构成了尊严的基础,根据所做的选择赋予选择者价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
23 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigating ethical dilemmas in complementary and alternative medicine: a narrative review. The criterion of human dignity in the Quran. How can physicians' professional reputation be damaged? Patients', nurses' and physicians' viewpoints. Ethical issues experienced by otolaryngologists: a conventional content analysis. Evaluation of medical sciences students' awareness of the patients' rights charter: a cross-sectional study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1