《野兽与猎犬:约翰·洛克与弗雷德里克·道格拉斯论人性的丧失》

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Jennifer A. Herdt
{"title":"《野兽与猎犬:约翰·洛克与弗雷德里克·道格拉斯论人性的丧失》","authors":"Jennifer A. Herdt","doi":"10.5840/jsce202111548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:The doctrine of the image of God is often regarded as grounding human dignity in something permanent and unchanging that transcends our attitudes and behaviors. Yet we persistently encounter the argument that particular human individuals or groups have acted so as to forfeit their moral standing as fellow humans. They are bestialized, categorized as non-human animals, lifting ordinary restraints on punishment. I examine the logic of this argument in John Locke, Thomas Aquinas, and contemporary felony disenfranchisement, showing how it involves slippage between the unobjectionable notion that specific rights may in particular circumstances be forfeited, and the deeply troubling claim that one's moral standing as human can as such be forfeited. I argue that an apparently similar rhetoric of dehumanization employed by Frederick Douglass, in contrast, refrains from stripping the opponent of moral considerability.","PeriodicalId":43321,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS","volume":"41 1","pages":"207 - 224"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Of Wild Beasts and Bloodhounds: John Locke and Frederick Douglass on the Forfeiture of Humanity\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer A. Herdt\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/jsce202111548\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT:The doctrine of the image of God is often regarded as grounding human dignity in something permanent and unchanging that transcends our attitudes and behaviors. Yet we persistently encounter the argument that particular human individuals or groups have acted so as to forfeit their moral standing as fellow humans. They are bestialized, categorized as non-human animals, lifting ordinary restraints on punishment. I examine the logic of this argument in John Locke, Thomas Aquinas, and contemporary felony disenfranchisement, showing how it involves slippage between the unobjectionable notion that specific rights may in particular circumstances be forfeited, and the deeply troubling claim that one's moral standing as human can as such be forfeited. I argue that an apparently similar rhetoric of dehumanization employed by Frederick Douglass, in contrast, refrains from stripping the opponent of moral considerability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"207 - 224\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/jsce202111548\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jsce202111548","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要:上帝形象的教义常常被认为是人类尊严的基础,它超越了我们的态度和行为,是永恒不变的。然而,我们不断地遇到这样的论点,即特定的人类个人或群体的行为是为了丧失他们作为人类同胞的道德地位。他们被兽化,被归类为非人类动物,解除了普通的惩罚限制。我考察了约翰·洛克、托马斯·阿奎那和当代重罪剥夺公民权这一论点的逻辑,展示了它是如何涉及到在特定情况下特定权利可能被剥夺这一不容置疑的观念与作为人类的道德地位可能因此被剥夺这一令人深感不安的主张之间的滑移的。我认为,弗雷德里克·道格拉斯(Frederick Douglass)所使用的一种明显类似的非人性化修辞,相反,避免剥夺对手的道德可观性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Of Wild Beasts and Bloodhounds: John Locke and Frederick Douglass on the Forfeiture of Humanity
ABSTRACT:The doctrine of the image of God is often regarded as grounding human dignity in something permanent and unchanging that transcends our attitudes and behaviors. Yet we persistently encounter the argument that particular human individuals or groups have acted so as to forfeit their moral standing as fellow humans. They are bestialized, categorized as non-human animals, lifting ordinary restraints on punishment. I examine the logic of this argument in John Locke, Thomas Aquinas, and contemporary felony disenfranchisement, showing how it involves slippage between the unobjectionable notion that specific rights may in particular circumstances be forfeited, and the deeply troubling claim that one's moral standing as human can as such be forfeited. I argue that an apparently similar rhetoric of dehumanization employed by Frederick Douglass, in contrast, refrains from stripping the opponent of moral considerability.
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
×
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