Afterword

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78973-821-620191016
• Published date: 18 November 2019
• Pages: 175-177
• Date: 18 November 2019
• Author: Michael L.Penn

Afterword

Michael L.Penn

Recurring threats to the world’s peace and security and a resurgence of virulent

forms of racism, nationalism, and authoritarianism have reminded us of how

very fragile human rights and human dignity continue to be. Events suggest that

these forms of human capital can be as easily trampled upon today as they were

in earlier periods of history when we had not yet developed the words and con-

cepts that capture something of what we might mean when we endeavor to pro-

tect human beings from unnecessary suffering, deprivation, and death brought on

by humanity’s inhumanity to itself.

Realizing our responsibility to protect it, this volume has sought to survey

the many ways that concern for human dignity may be articulated and opera-

tionalized. And although a range of themes have been explored here, each of the

authors has situated the concept of dignity at the foundation of the discourse

on human rights; each has suggested, in their own ways, that without concern

for human dignity – however, dimly understood the construct may be – much of

what we pursue when we pursue human rights may be lost in the fog of compet-

ing interests, dubious cultural or political claims, and/or centuries-old traditions

that are invoked in order to deny to some that which is justly the birthright of all.

As these essays suggest, human dignity embodies the notion of a desire, not just

to protect against brutality, but to create conditions that can permit the human race

to ourish. Every civilization on earth has had something to say about these condi-

tions, and many cultures have contributed to the reservoir of understandings that

illuminate what it might mean to honor and respect the dignity and rights of others.

These accumulated insights can continue to nourish us, even as we draw upon fresh

insights resulting from the work of men and women in a variety of elds.

Twenty-ve hundred years ago, Mencius, a Chinese sage, noted that when life

is properly lived and the state is wisely ordered, a humanizing process unfolds. The

primary responsibility of government, he suggested, was to create the conditions

necessary for the excellent qualities that adorn the human reality to be realized.

At the heart of Mencius’s philosophy was an understanding of humanity’s capac-

ity for moral responsiveness and the conviction that what matters most in human

interactions is the motivation of the actors and their capacity for mutual respect

and regard based on recognition of their common humanity (Bloom, 1987).

It is interesting to note that in Mencius’s defense of the good qualities and

capacities that dene humanity, and in his insistence that the state’s primary

responsibility is to nourish and protect these qualities, he proved to be among

the very earliest defenders of human dignity and human rights. Mencius insisted

that there is no moral principle that precludes the ousting of a ruler who “muti-

lates humaneness and cripples rights” (Bloom, 1987, p. 262). He argued that the

overthrow of the last ruler of the Shang by the Chou founders was not regicide

but was morally justied punishment of a ruler who had done violence against