The relationship between a mountain goat and the concept of dignity belongs to the world of myths and symbols. I have seen such myth and symbol in mountainous areas, such as north Spain and the Alps. Mountain goats live in the mountains in silence and don’t like contact with human beings. They move graciously, fast and in groups. This behavior is often characterized as full of dignity. Another animal that shares this symbol and myth is the wolf, especially after some biologists in the 80s changed the negative perception.
Furthermore, dignity was never a concept to be defined. It is the essence of the United Nations Human Rights. It is also the essence of the French Revolution in 1789. Germany’s Fundamental Law1949 claims the essence is dignity as an intangible concept. Spanish Constitution article 10 in 1976 claims the main right is dignity. Besides many other Constitutions, the Christian “Pacem in terries” substitutes God’s action by universal dignity. Helsinky Conference in 1975 claims Human Rights arise from inherent human dignity.
I studied these and other fundamental texts in Canada during the summer of 2005. As you can see, no text dares to define Dignity, which exists thanks to human willingness, not thanks to a rational need. I understand it as a way to achieve consensus between different cultures by avoiding the explicit action of God (and the religious diversity). This was very well summarized by a Spanish Poet: “Today is bad, but tomorrow is mine” meaning that human being is the free actor of life.
According to some people, the concept of Dignity is not universal, since two world cultures do not accept it. Saudi Arabia didn’t vote positively in 1948 (Resolution GA 217 III) because they didn’t accept the right to change religion. Also Singapore explained in 1989 that Human Rights are occidental and are not therefore based on their Buddhist values, namely, society over “I”, the value of family, the attention and the collective support of the individual. I believe in Human Dignity, not in Cultural Dignity, which is by definition universal.
Finally, I compare the concept of Dignity and the behaviour of mountain goats and wolfs. In Myanmar (a country I will explain later) there are hospitals for animals. The famous King Ashoka founded them based on universal compassion and the four essential Buddhist truths (humans reincarnate in animals and animals in human beings). I am fully aware that it is as saying that number seven is green. I am comparing objects at two different levels of perception, which makes it an intuitive comparison
Wolfs are very adaptable creatures and can be found in a variety of regions where they have been hunted by humans and are often endangered. These canids have a very complex social behaviour. Against common belief, they have never attacked humans but in very specific situations and only when sick. For some unknown reason, they never attack animals standing on two legs.
Matthew, what is your view?
Labels: dignity, mountain goat, wolf
1 Comments:
This is a very difficult topic which should be discussed at great length. Since we don’t have that chance here, I will try to be brief. The subject of dignity is philosophically difficult. Of course, I would want everyone to have dignity. Many of the changes I have dedicated my life to would also have the dual effect of increasing human dignity. However, calling dignity a right in and of itself carries some difficult consequences. For example, governments are required to ensure that the rights of their citizens are not infringed. The perception of dignity is such a broad issue that defending this right is quite a difficult thing. In Germany, many of their social benefits are founded upon this principle. By contrast, in the US various schools of though believe that the right to fail (which can be very undignified) is vital to creating a culture of success.
Personally, it appears to me that governments which have recognized a right to dignity have generally ended up with legal and social side effects that are not in their best interests. Examples of this can include social welfare models that are so comfortable that citizens have very little motivation not to rely on them. However, even if it were easy to implement, in the end, I believe that personal dignity is not a right to be upheld by a government. It is certainly a desirable state which I hope ever human being has the opportunity to achieve, but not something that should be guaranteed them by the State.
Post a Comment
<< Home