Advertisement

Continental Philosophy Review

, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 309–323 | Cite as

Dignity at the limit: Jean-Luc Nancy on the possibility of incommensurable worth

  • Bryan Lueck
Article

Abstract

Dignity, according to some recent arguments, is a useless concept, giving vague expression to moral intuitions that are better captured by other, better defined concepts. In this paper, I defend the concept of dignity against such skeptical arguments. I begin with a description of the defining features of the Kantian conception of dignity. I then examine one of the strongest arguments against that conception, advanced by Arthur Schopenhauer in On the Basis of Morality. After considering some standard accounts of dignity, showing how they fail adequately to address Schopenhauer’s concern, I propose and defend a new account of dignity, drawing on the ontology of Jean-Luc Nancy.

Keywords

Dignity Ethics Immanuel Kant Jean-Luc Nancy Ontology 

References

  1. Bultot, Robert. 1961. Mépris du monde, misère et dignité de l’homme, dans la pensée d’Innocent III. Cahiers de civilization médiévale 4: 441–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Hegel, G.W.F. 1969. Hegel’s science of logic. Trans. A.V. Miller. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  3. Hegel, G.W.F. 1975. Hegel’s aesthetics: Lectures on fine art, Vol. 1. Trans. T.M. Knox. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Iglesias, Teresa. 2001. Bedrock truths and the dignity of the individual. Logos: A Journal of Catholic Thought and Culture 4: 114–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kant, Immanuel. 1996a. Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Trans. Mary J. Gregor. In Practical philosophy, The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant, ed. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Kant, Immanuel. 1996b. Critique of practical reason. Trans. Mary J. Gregor. In Practical philosophy, The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant, ed. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Kant, Immanuel. 1996c. Metaphysics of morals. Trans. Mary J. Gregor. In Practical philosophy, The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant, ed. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Kass, Leon R. 1999. The hungry soul: Eating and the perfecting of our nature. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1987. Introduction to the work of Marcel Mauss. Trans. Felicity Baker. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Lyotard, Jean-François. 1993. Libidinal economy. Trans. Iain Hamilton Grant. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Macklin, Ruth. 2003. Dignity is a useless concept. BMJ 327: 1419–1420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McCrudden, Christopher. 2008. Human dignity and judicial interpretation of human rights. The European Journal of International Law 19: 655–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nancy, Jean-Luc. 1997. The sense of the world. Trans: Jeffrey Librett. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  14. Nancy, Jean-Luc. 2000. Being singular plural. Trans. Robert D.Richardson and Anne E. O’Byrne. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Nancy, Jean-Luc. 2002. Hegel: The restlessness of the negative. Trans. Jason Smith and Steven Miller. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  16. Nancy, Jean-Luc. 2003a. A finite thinking. (ed: Simon Sparks). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Nancy, Jean-Luc. 2003b. Limits, borders, and shores of singularity. In Encounters with Alphonso Lingis. (ed: Alexander E. Hooke and Wolfgang W. Fuchs). Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  18. Pinker, Stephen. 2008. The stupidity of dignity. The New Republic. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/the-stupidity-dignity.
  19. Rawls, John. 1980. Kantian constructivism in moral theory. Journal of Philosophy 77: 515–572.Google Scholar
  20. Rosen, Michael. 2012. Dignity: Its history and meaning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Saint Leo the Great. 1996. Sermons. Trans. Jane Patricia Freeland and Agnes Josephine Conway. Washington: The Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
  22. Schopenhauer, Arthur. 1965. On the basis of morality. Trans. E.F.J. Payne. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Southern Illinois University EdwardsvilleEdwardsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations