A Historical Perspective on Dignity

The first keynote at the IAMCR 2019 conference is by Javier Gomá, whose theme is human dignity. He suggests that dignity is the most revolutionary concept of the 20th century. It has become a widespread concept that animates many modern causes, from unionism through feminism to emerging new political ideologies, and is crucial to many current debates about the role and impact of new technologies, yet remains ignored by many recent philosophical works.

There has been a certain revival of interest in the concept of human dignity in recent years, however. (Argh, the wifi and thus the live translation audio feed from the Spanish has dropped out.) The concept of dignity goes back to ancient times, however, and was at first often related to death and memory after death – focussing on how the upper classes and their deeds would be remembered after death. Eventually, however, the concept of dignity was extended to a wider range of people, and blended with Christian beliefs about redemption after death. Finally, this was extended to all humans, and linked to humankind’s special role in the Christian worldview.

More modern philosophers, like Kant, repositioned dignity again, and encouraged us to act in accordance with the dignity we possess. Morality and happiness thereby derive from the dignified actions of humans as autonomous subjects, even in spite of our lower instincts. Virtuous habits do not guarantee happiness, but dignity is always available, and something we can practice anywhere and at any time. Dignity is thus an intrinsic human value, and the objectification of humans is fundamentally immoral.

Dignity is thus a human duty, created by our reason and morality. Only humans fully possess this quality, and it cannot be inalienated or expropriated: even public interest must yield to private dignity – that intimate quality of the individual. This perspective is inherently opposed to the Machiavellian view, and the tyrannies of majoritarianism, that position the interest of the state above all.

Dignity is thus anti-utilitarian and a hindrance to iniquities, but also to some just causes that seek to benefit the majority while working against the interests of the few. It overturns the law of the survival of the fittest, and instead ensures also the survival of the weakest. This shift is evidenced even in prehistoric hominid communities that can be shown to have supported the elderly and weak through group cooperation.

In the 20th century, then, the concept mutated in democratic contexts that inscribed egalitarianism into their structures and thereby affirmed the dignity of all citizens independent of their personal status or class. Democratic dignity is received at birth and remains valid even if it is contradicted by the odious indignities of its bearer’s life story. But this is an exceedingly difficult lesson to be learnt collectively, and built only on the horrible experience of global indignities during the 20th century.

The challenge of democracies is thus ultimately to educate citizens about their own dignity, and to realise it. But it cannot be explained objectively and rationally, but is learnt by the direct intuition of its essence; it would be futile to order someone to be virtuous and dignified. Dignity is understood especially well in historical contrast, as past indignities are recognised, judged to be intolerable, and prevented from being repeated in the present.

Violations of the dignity of others do continue in the present, of course, but nobody can commit them without degrading themselves; such violations create revulsions in others, and – assuming some degree of morality – also in the perpetrator. This is visible today especially in the public responses to the harsh treatment of refugees by governments and other official entities.

Where in the past there were different kinds of dignity, dignity has thus been universalised; there is nothing greater than the common dignity. All individuals share their humanity, and this egalitarianism of dignity leads straight to cosmopolitanism, which seeks the establishment of a shared global citizenship that recognises no inherent differences between individuals. Perhaps this goal is ultimately unattainable, but there are powerful trends towards this cosmopolitan perspective on human dignity.