The Kantian Approach to Human Rights – Thinking about Dignity and Its Implications

1. The Kantian Approach to Human Rights – Thinking about Dignity and Its Implications ER 11, Spring 2012

3. Remember • UDHR preamble: “inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family“ • American Convention on Human Rights, African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights • leave dignity undefined – to leave it open to interpretations • in 2008, President's Council on Bioethics tried to reach consensus about what dignity meant but failed

4. Dignity and Respect • “dignity:” not of much systematic use in Anglo-American philosophy: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has no entry • More common: respect –respicere: look back, look again • Having respect for X contrasts with being oblivious to, ignoring, or disregarding X • Dignity: source of respect

5. Dignity • Most eminent theorist of “dignity” in Western tradition: Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

6. Keep in mind • UDHR not committed to this way of thinking about dignity • But as philosophical idea, tied to Kant • offers one way of thinking about what it is to have rights “in virtue of being human”

7. Kantian Legacy: German Basic Law • Article 1, paragraph 1: “Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority." • mentioned before right to life • Compare: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

8. Unconstitutional on grounds of dignity • life imprisonment without parole – must be able to regain freedom • law to shoot down airliners if used as weapons • first law legalizing abortion in 1975: court held embryos had dignity • early-term abortions still illegal, state declines to prosecute

9. Dignity: can’t give it away • peep shows once ruled to violate dignity of performer, regardless of her attitude • revised, but shows where performer cannot see viewers remain outlawed

10. See, e.g., also South Africa • Section 10 of constitution: • ”Everyone has inherent dignity and the right to have their dignity respected and protected.“

11. Kant’s “critical” philosophy • exploring limitations of reason • Reason goes astray thinking knowledge is something to be found “out there” • reason imposes structures -- presupposed for reason to have any experiences • experience world as we do b/c reason imposes structures

12. Humility and Glory reason not equipped to assess questions about God, freedom of will, immortality understanding human beings as beings with reason becomes central as theoretical reason faces limitations from within, so practical reason does too – will lead to “dignity”

13. Important for us: there is no source of value other than reason

14. How the will of rational beings operates

15. Moral psychology: the will • Will is capacity to act on representation of laws (G 4:412), on principles • principles = representations of laws = laws I made guideline of my action • rational agency: to see inclinations as possible grounds for action, to decide whether to adopt them as principles/maxims • willing differs from desiring, involves determination to act in pursuit of something

16. Categorical Imperative • Imperatives = objective principles = principle that constrain will “as such,” will of each rational being • hypothetical imperatives presuppose end, propose action in its pursuit: “must do X IF you want Y” • categorical imperative constrains will not relative to any end, but unconditionally

17. Categorical Imperative: a moral notion • Given centrality of reason, this is what morality is “all about” • CI is something whose worth we recognize by reason from within ourselves; recognize that worth as greater than that of any object of inclination • CI = practical law = imperative of morality = supreme moral principle

18. One formulation of the Categorical Imperative “Act so that you use humanity in your person, as well as in the person of every other, always at the same time as end, never merely as a means.”(G 4:429)

19. “not merely” • “Act so that you use humanity in your person, as well as in the person of every other, always at the same time as end, never merely as a means”

20. Why does this constrain any act of willing, simply because it is an act of willing?

21. Paragraph leading up to that statement “If then there is to be a supreme principle and, with respect to the human will, a categorical imperative, it must be one such that, from the representation of what is necessarily an end for everyone because it is an end in itself, it constitutes an objective principle of the will and thus can serve as a universal practical law.” • Merely restating what a categorical imperative is

22. Then: “The ground of this principle is: rational nature exists as an end in itself. The human will necessarily represents his own existence in this way; so far it is thus a subjective principle of human actions.” • Subjective: referring to the given person • end in itself: end whose worth is unconditional and independent of desire • Why does the human will necessarily think of its rational nature as an end in itself?

23. Point seems to be this: • Being a rational will means setting ends (goals) • by setting any end for itself, rational will thinks of something else (that end) as having value • For the will to adopt an inclination as a principle, for it to be motivated, it must endorse the end -- must think of itself as conferring value

24. Cont. • have reason to regard our ends as good only to extent that we esteem our capacity to set ends as something good • by assuming anything matters to us as an end, we must assume we matter in virtue of being able to set ends

25. Then: “But every other rational being also represents his existence in this way consequent on just the same rational ground that also holds for me;” • if you view yourself as having a value-conferring status in virtue of power of rational choice, understand that anyone with that power must have same view of herself

26. Then: • “thus it is at the same time an objective principle from which, as a supreme practical ground, it must be possible to derive all laws of the will.” • What is it? • “rational nature exists as an end in itself”

27. Kant takes this to imply: • “Act so that you use humanity in your person, as well as in the person of every other, always at the same time as end, never merely as a means (G 4: 429) • Why does this follow?

28. Suppose I am treating somebody merely as a means • Then I am treating somebody merely as a means who must see himself as source of value • But capacity in virtue of which he must do so is the same capacity that I have • But disregarding that capacity the way I do here means to disregard a capacity that I must value

29. Reason falls into contradiction with itself if it does not take seriously the implications of fact that others too are endowed with reason

30. each rational nature must be taken seriously as end in itself – source of value • Moral law is one we put in place ourselves and obey (autonomy) • rational nature, ability to set an end, is our humanity -- humanity is our being human, not “humankind” • Very different outlook from utilitarianism

31. Primacy examples of treating people merely as means Coercion Deception

32. Examples: non-utilitarian reasoning • duty not to commit suicide, not to lie, not to let talents rust • masturbation -- using one’s person only for desire satisfaction • Self-esteem is crucial • drunkenness, snobbery, servility, excessive humility • to others: beneficence, being grateful, no excessive pride, gossip, mockery

33. How would this ground rights? • Remember: what would the nature of our relationship have to be for you to claim a moral right against me? • Rights: to have an interest that is of sufficient importance to require certain behavior of others • Kant’s answer: (higher order) “interest” would be that of being a person endowed with reason

34. Reason falls into contradiction with itself if it does not take seriously the implications of fact that others too are endowed with reason

35. “Natural rights” answer? • Natural rights: not by convention; not by human design; not in virtue of any results of human reason; we “find it” to be true, and merely acknowledge it • Yes, in a sense: appeals only to natural attributes of persons; force of rights can be recognized as valid by reasonable people independently of positive law • No appeal to convention

36. “Natural rights” answer? • No, in the sense that Kant refers to results of human reason to explain what rights are • Rights not “given” by force outside of human reason • in that sense, we should not think of this as a natural rights answer

37. Dignity • “Reason accordingly refers every maxim of the will as giving universal law to every other will (…), and does so (…) from the idea of the dignity of rational being, who obeys no law other than which he himself at the same time gives.” (4.434) • “What has a price can be replaced by something else as its equivalent; what on the other hand is raised above all price and therefore admits of no equivalent has a dignity.” (4:434) • “… that which constitutes the condition under which alone something can be an end in itself has not merely a relative worth, that is, a price, but an inner worth, that is, dignity. (4:435) • “Hence morality, and humanity insofar as it is capable of morality, is that which alone has dignity.” (4:435)

38. What is dignity? A proposal “Dignity” characterizes the kind of worth rational beings have in virtue of the following properties: • They set goals – choose principles of action. • This choosing, as an act of a rational being, is subject to the Categorical Imperative. • Thereby, rational beings are source of all other value: no other unconditional source of value.

39. To sum up • dignity is absolute worth grounded in the rational capacities for morality • not conditional on how well capacities are exercised • Not diminished through vice or bad action, nor increased through virtue or morally correct action

40. Cont. • wrongdoing may call for punishment (also death!), may be grounds for forfeiting some rights, but wrongdoer are not worthless • Respect need not be earned • morally worst have same dignity as morally best, although the former fail to live up to their dignity

41. Illustration • 2006 constitutional challenge to part of German Aviation Security Act • Re. permission to shoot down hijacked planes that are about to be used as weapons

43. Kantian language • “Such a treatment ignores the status of the persons affected as subjects endowed with dignity and inalienable rights. By their killing being used as a means to save others, they are treated as objects and at the same time deprived of their rights; with their rights disposed of unilaterally by the state, the persons on board of the aircraft, who, as victims, are themselves in need of protection, are denied the value which is due to a human being for his or her own sake.”