Dignity: Its History and Meaning

It's dangerous when ideas are elevated to such heights that we don't bother to understand them. Dignity is one of those things, I fear--so obvious I've never thought to ask what it means.Rosen looks at dignity through some interesting lenses--from dwarf-tossing to satire to the Catholic Church's evolving view of women. He shows how, if we leave the concept mysterious and untouchable, it can be used to justify just about anything.On the other hand, dignity is fundamental to law, society, the humanities, and the essence of being human. So rather than taking it for granted, and rather than dismissing it as indefinable, we should notice the various ways that it's being understood today.

Excellent book on Dignity's history and meaning. A bit philosophical at times, but it was short enough to be enjoyed.

This was stimulating to engage with, but it was also a little bit irritating. I felt it could have done with a bit (a lot) more Nietzsche. It starts off literally in the resolutely un-Nietzscheian environment of a university common room, and stays there, even when it is treating ideas with major political consequences.For instance he chides at one crucial moment that it is 'not particularly clever' to describe a position he has just detailed as 'stupid'. Given that the philosophical position he is talking about justifies the arrogation of privileged rights of adjudication on social and political structures in the society I happen to live in, on the basis of an intellectually incoherent bunch of superstitions (by people who are demonstrably happy to use such arguments to justify gratuitous cruelty - 'objective disorder', anybody), our agreement stretches no further than that 'stupid' is indeed the wrong word. A compounding problem (for me) is that, in spite of working through any number of arguments against deontological ethics, he is unwilling to give up on the idea of deontological ethics as such. I, on the other hand, accord deontological ethics the same sort of intellectual respect that I accord to belief in fairies - as far as I (like Alfred Doolittle) can see, its core constituency is intellectually complacent bourgeois males such as priests, constitutional judges and certain types of philosopher. Not company I have automatic sympathy with.

I took many notes and have great discussion questions at parties -- such as, the dignity of dwarf tossing

good quality

I have an undergrad in philosophy. I am doing a piece on dignity. I needed a book detailing the history of the word especially as it pertains to philosophy. This collection of words accomplished so little towards that goal. It barely touched on the philosophical history of the word. It barely delves into much. This collection of words is VERY short. I didn't know just how small it is! I believe my undergraduate thesis is lengthier than this book. This book does little to elaborate on dignity's historical/philosophical meaning. I didn't read beyond the first part. I needed the history of dignity and its meaning not the application term.Altogether this was a waste of my twenty dollars. I've bought two other books, dignity: it's essential role in solving conflict and human dignity. If you're looking for dignity you're not going to find it here!

Excellent. H.Sh.

This is a fine example of the best contemporary scholarship in political theory. It is informed by philosophical argument, yet Rosen does not limit himself to the analysis of concepts. He recognizes that they play a role in political life before anyone raises the question of their meaning and significance. Human dignity is one such centrally important notion. It may hover on the margin of American rights jurisprudence but it has been centrally embraced by the Catholic Church, the United Nations, the German Basic Law, and the constitutions of other states. At the same time it is a central philosophical notion in the thought of Immanuel Kant. Michael Rosen provides a succinct overview of these multiple contexts of relevance. He even includes the historical sources of the notion of human dignity, biblical, classical, medieval and modern. The contemporary application of human dignity, as the universal ground of worth for every human being, has been distilled from this rich background. Rosen is a fair and judicious guide. His real interest, however, as befits a political theorist, is to ask about the coherence of the idea. Can it bear the weight of a fundamental pivot on which our rights jurisprudence turns? Is dignity the source of rights? If it is, is there any sense in which dignity sets a limit to rights as such? Do we have a right to engage in activities that violate our notion of human dignity? Dwarf tossing contests are one such notorious case, but there are many others. Rosen is hesitant to express any hard and fast applications of dignity, but he struggles admirably with the need to preserve its core. The approach might be called non-foundational but that does not mean it is without foundations. They lie, rather, within our innermost response to one another. In the end these are the only foundations we have or need.

Ok, by all means. Thanks.

I love it