En
Register Log in
  1. Main
  2. Monograph
  3. Modern Challenges of Education and Psychology of P...
  4. Kontseptsiia chelovecheskogo dostoinstva: pozitsii...

Kontseptsiia chelovecheskogo dostoinstva: pozitsii videniia

Book Chapter
DOI: 10.31483/r-105668
Open Access
Monograph «Modern Challenges of Education and Psychology of Personality Formation»
Creative commons logo
Published in:
Monograph «Modern Challenges of Education and Psychology of Personality Formation»
Author:
Aleksandr I. Kugai 1
Work direction:
Глава 12
Pages:
156-165
Received: 12 March 2023

Rating:
Article accesses:
1086
Published in:
РИНЦ
1 Severo-Zapadnyi institut upravleniia FGBOU VO "Rossiiskaia akademiia narodnogo khoziaistva i gosudarstvennoi sluzhby pri Prezidente RF"
For citation:

Abstract

Dignity is something that virtually all people want. It is the original expression of the human experience, gaining credibility through the convergent demands of people around the world. Nevertheless, the concept of human dignity is in unhelpful disarray. Dignity is variously viewed as an antecedent, consequence, value, principle, and experience from philosophical, legal, pragmatic, psychological, behavioral, and cultural perspectives. Which of these conceptions of human dignity is more relevant to global, common interests, both as a point of convergence and as a diagnostic of policy, pedagogical practice? The author's focus is on four broad themes: dignity as 1) a metaphysical grounding of human rights and responsibilities, 2) virtuous behavior, 3) perspectives of the «other», and 4) the subjective experience of the individual. It is recommended that dignity be viewed as a set of individually valued well-being, shaped by relationships with others, influenced by the physical world, and framed in terms of values. From this perspective, the idea of dignity corresponds to the priorities of both individualistic and communitarian cultures.

References

  1. 1. Кугай А.И. Права человека: от теории – к политике / А.И. Кугай // Управленческое консультирование. – 2021. – №5. – С. 32–44.
  2. 2. Кугай А.И. Экстремизм: природа, симптоматика, опыт и условия противодействия / А.И. Кугай // Управленческое консультирование. – 2015. – №2. – С. 16–26.
  3. 3. Кугай А.И. «Цифровое поколение»: угрозы и надежды в эпоху информационно-цифровой цивилизации / А.И. Кугай // Управленческое консультирование. – 2019. – №7. – С. 90–99.
  4. 4. Кугай А.И. Базовые человеческие ценности и ценности политические / А.И. Кугай // Актуальные вопросы саморазвития личности: психолого-педагогический аспект: сборник материалов Всероссийской научно-практической конференции с международным участием. – Чебоксары, 2022. – С. 157–160.
  5. 5. Ashcroft R.E. Making sense of dignity. Journal of Medical Ethics, 2005. N31, pp. 679–682.
  6. 6. Conroy J. Unspeakable acts, ordinary people: The dynamics of torture. New York: Knopf, 2000.
  7. 7. Donnelly J. The relative universality of human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 2007. N29, pp. 281–306.
  8. 8. Downie J. Unilateral withholding and the withdrawal of potential life-sustaining treatment: Aviolation of dignity under the law. Journal of Palliative Care, 2004. N20, pp.143–149.
  9. 9. Gready P. The politics of human rights. Third World Quarterly, 2003. N24, pp.745–757.
  10. 10. Hairy M. Another look at dignity. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 2004. N13, pp. 7–14.
  11. 11. Haslam N. Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2006. N10, pp. 252–264.
  12. 12. Kaplan A. American ethics and public policy. Daedalus, 1958. N87, pp. 48–77.
  13. 13. Kitayama S., & Rose Markus H. The pursuit of happiness and the realization sympathy: Cultural patterns of self, social relations, and well-being. In E. Diener & E.M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 113–161). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 2000.
  14. 14. Lasswell H.D., & McDougal M.S. Jurisprudence for a free society: Studies in law, science and policy. Volumes I and II. New Haven, CT: New Haven Press. 1992.
  15. 15. Lasswell H. D., & Kaplan A. Power and society: A framework for political inquiry. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Shils, E. (1958).
  16. 16. Ideology and civility. Sewanee Review, 1950. N66, pp. 450–480.
  17. 17. Macklin, R. Reflections on the human dignity symposium: Is dignity a useless concept? Journal of Palliative Care, 2004. N20, pp. 212–216.
  18. 18. Meyer M.J. Dignity as a (modern) value. In D. Kretzmer & E. Klein (Eds.), The concept of human dignity in human rights discourse (pp. 195–207). New York: Kluwer Law International. 2002.
  19. 19. Oishi S. Goals as cornerstones of subjective well-being: Linking individuals and culture. In E. Diener & E.M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 87–112). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.
  20. 20. Rorty R. Human rights, rationality and sentimentality. In S. Shute & S. Hurley (Eds.), On human rights: Oxford amnesty lectures 1993 (pp. 111–134). New York: Basic Books, 1993.
  21. 21. Schultz P.W. The structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2001. N21, pp. 327–339.
  22. 22. Schwartz S.H. Universalism values and the inclusiveness of our moral universe. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 2007. N38, pp. 711–728.
  23. 23. Suh E.M. Self, the hyphen between culture and subjective well-being. In E. Diener & E.M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 13–36). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 2000.
  24. 24. Yalom I.D. Existential psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books. 1980.

Comments(0)

When adding a comment stipulate:
  • the relevance of the published material;
  • general estimation (originality and relevance of the topic, completeness, depth, comprehensiveness of topic disclosure, consistency, coherence, evidence, structural ordering, nature and the accuracy of the examples, illustrative material, the credibility of the conclusions;
  • disadvantages, shortcomings;
  • questions and wishes to author.