尊严在医疗保健中仍有必要吗?从定义到承认人的尊严

Marcin Paweł Ferdynus
{"title":"尊严在医疗保健中仍有必要吗?从定义到承认人的尊严","authors":"Marcin Paweł Ferdynus","doi":"10.1007/s10943-023-01995-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The concept of dignity is not, as some scholars claim, an unnecessary moral idea, and nor need it have religious overtones or be characterised by speciesism. In this article, I try to show that dignity can be defined and recognised. The starting point for the argumentation is the four typologies of dignity, which show that the term ‘dignity’ can denote significantly different concepts, and that the different concepts of dignity can have significantly different ontological senses. A unified typology of dignity allows for five categories to be distinguished: inherent dignity, dignity based on changeable qualities, moral dignity, bestowed dignity and comportment dignity. I take the first two categories of dignity as the object of the analysis, with which I seek to formulate a philosophical response to the charge of speciesism and to show on what basis it can be maintained that all human beings possess dignity. To this end, I distinguish between existential dignity, actual dignity, and potential dignity. Distinguishing these types of dignity becomes possible in the light of Aquinas’ and Aristotle’s views. In the final section, I point to two ways of recognising dignity. The first is based on certain narratives and emotional states (‘ecumenical model of dignity’), while the second is related to a specific moral experience developed within ethical personalism.</p>","PeriodicalId":501640,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Religion and Health","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is Dignity Still Necessary in Health Care? From Definition to Recognition of Human Dignity\",\"authors\":\"Marcin Paweł Ferdynus\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10943-023-01995-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The concept of dignity is not, as some scholars claim, an unnecessary moral idea, and nor need it have religious overtones or be characterised by speciesism. In this article, I try to show that dignity can be defined and recognised. The starting point for the argumentation is the four typologies of dignity, which show that the term ‘dignity’ can denote significantly different concepts, and that the different concepts of dignity can have significantly different ontological senses. A unified typology of dignity allows for five categories to be distinguished: inherent dignity, dignity based on changeable qualities, moral dignity, bestowed dignity and comportment dignity. I take the first two categories of dignity as the object of the analysis, with which I seek to formulate a philosophical response to the charge of speciesism and to show on what basis it can be maintained that all human beings possess dignity. To this end, I distinguish between existential dignity, actual dignity, and potential dignity. Distinguishing these types of dignity becomes possible in the light of Aquinas’ and Aristotle’s views. In the final section, I point to two ways of recognising dignity. The first is based on certain narratives and emotional states (‘ecumenical model of dignity’), while the second is related to a specific moral experience developed within ethical personalism.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501640,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Religion and Health\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Religion and Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-023-01995-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Religion and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-023-01995-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尊严的概念并不像某些学者所说的那样,是一种不必要的道德观念,也不需要带有宗教色彩或物种主义的特征。在本文中,我试图说明尊严是可以定义和认可的。论证的出发点是尊严的四种类型学,它们表明 "尊严 "一词可以表示明显不同的概念,不同的尊严概念可以具有明显不同的本体论意义。统一的尊严类型学可将尊严分为五类:固有尊严、基于可变品质的尊严、道德尊严、天赋尊严和举止尊严。我将前两类尊严作为分析对象,试图以此对物种主义的指控做出哲学回应,并说明在什么基础上可以坚持所有人都拥有尊严。为此,我区分了存在的尊严、现实的尊严和潜在的尊严。根据阿奎那和亚里士多德的观点,区分这些尊严类型成为可能。在最后一部分,我指出了承认尊严的两种方式。第一种基于某些叙事和情感状态("普世尊严模式"),第二种则与伦理个人主义中形成的特定道德体验相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is Dignity Still Necessary in Health Care? From Definition to Recognition of Human Dignity

The concept of dignity is not, as some scholars claim, an unnecessary moral idea, and nor need it have religious overtones or be characterised by speciesism. In this article, I try to show that dignity can be defined and recognised. The starting point for the argumentation is the four typologies of dignity, which show that the term ‘dignity’ can denote significantly different concepts, and that the different concepts of dignity can have significantly different ontological senses. A unified typology of dignity allows for five categories to be distinguished: inherent dignity, dignity based on changeable qualities, moral dignity, bestowed dignity and comportment dignity. I take the first two categories of dignity as the object of the analysis, with which I seek to formulate a philosophical response to the charge of speciesism and to show on what basis it can be maintained that all human beings possess dignity. To this end, I distinguish between existential dignity, actual dignity, and potential dignity. Distinguishing these types of dignity becomes possible in the light of Aquinas’ and Aristotle’s views. In the final section, I point to two ways of recognising dignity. The first is based on certain narratives and emotional states (‘ecumenical model of dignity’), while the second is related to a specific moral experience developed within ethical personalism.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信