A Christian Theological Account of Human Worth

Author(s):  
David P. Gushee

This chapter argues that biblical revelation served as the most important source, at least in European civilization, for the still critically important moral claim that each human life carries profound worth, and the related moral-legal demand that each human being’s dignity must be respected. In Christian theo-ethical terms, this means that the real issue is ‘the God-declared sacredness of each human life with correlated moral obligations’ rather than merely ‘human dignity’. The chapter enters into the biblical materials to present in their own distinctive ways central elements that gave birth to a sacredness-of-life norm and continue to fund that norm today. I reserve a few comments at the end of the chapter to discuss how and why ‘sacredness of human life’ became ‘human dignity’, and what was lost (and perhaps gained) when that transition occurred in the modern period.

Author(s):  
Miriam Laclavíková ◽  
Tomáš Gábriš

The article describes the legal regulation of high treason in the Act for the Protection of the People’s Democratic Republic, and the practice of its judicial application. The authors innovatively place the issue in a broader historical, philosophical (ethical, or axiological) and methodological context. They are inclined to conclude that the real traitors were not the tried defendants. The necessity of such an adjustment was in itself questionable at the philosophical and ideological level. Its necessity was manifested rather on a political and power-repressive levels. At the same time, should we consider human life and human dignity as inviolable values, regulation and practice of the period under review were unacceptable.


1983 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 413-413
Author(s):  
Seymour Fisher
Keyword(s):  
The Real ◽  

EMPIRISMA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Arif Dan Yuli Darwati

This paper will try to explain the relationship between religion and culture. These two topics are the most important items that are inseparable in the history of human civilization from the classical to the modern period. Religion is ahuman belief system that is related to God. If the rule comes from God, then it cannot be said to be a culture, because it is not human creation, but God’s creation that is absolute. Religion is interpreted as part of the life (culture) ofindividuals or groups, each of which has the authority to understand religion and apply it. With the characteristics as indicated by Fazlur Rahman, wherever religion is located, it is hoped that it can provide guidance on values or moralsfor all activities of human life, whether social, cultural, economic or political. Not infrequently also religion becomes a determining factor in the adhesive process of social cultural interaction of the community as well as unifying thenation. Culture and religion are something different but can influence each other so that new cultures or mixing of cultures emerge. The opinion of Endang Saifudin Anshari who said in his writing that religion and culture do notinclude each other, in principle one is not part of the other and each consists of itself. Between them, of course, they are closely related like us, we see in everyday life and human life. As also seen in the close relationship between husband and wife who can give birth to a son but the husband is not part of the wife, and vice versa. Religion and culture are two different things but cannot be separated. The existence of a religion will be greatly influenced and affect thepractice of a religion in question. And conversely, a culture will be greatly influenced by the beliefs of the society in which culture develops. Therefore religion is not only an individual problem but religion is also a social affair whichultimately religious people are not only able to give birth to individual piety but also must be able to give birth to social piety.Key words: Interaction, Religion, Culture,


AI and Ethics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Hanna ◽  
Emre Kazim

AbstractAI Ethics is a burgeoning and relatively new field that has emerged in response to growing concerns about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on human individuals and their social institutions. In turn, AI ethics is a part of the broader field of digital ethics, which addresses similar concerns generated by the development and deployment of new digital technologies. Here, we tackle the important worry that digital ethics in general, and AI ethics in particular, lack adequate philosophical foundations. In direct response to that worry, we formulate and rationally justify some basic concepts and principles for digital ethics/AI ethics, all drawn from a broadly Kantian theory of human dignity. Our argument, which is designed to be relatively compact and easily accessible, is presented in ten distinct steps: (1) what “digital ethics” and “AI ethics” mean, (2) refuting the dignity-skeptic, (3) the metaphysics of human dignity, (4) human happiness or flourishing, true human needs, and human dignity, (5) our moral obligations with respect to all human real persons, (6) what a natural automaton or natural machine is, (7) why human real persons are not natural automata/natural machines: because consciousness is a form of life, (8) our moral obligations with respect to the design and use of artificial automata or artificial machines, aka computers, and digital technology more generally, (9) what privacy is, why invasions of digital privacy are morally impermissible, whereas consensual entrances into digital privacy are either morally permissible or even obligatory, and finally (10) dignitarian morality versus legality, and digital ethics/AI ethics. We conclude by asserting our strongly-held belief that a well-founded and generally-accepted dignitarian digital ethics/AI ethics is of global existential importance for humanity.


1951 ◽  
Vol 42 (165-168) ◽  
pp. 219-223
Keyword(s):  
The Real ◽  

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-131
Author(s):  
Lukman Hamdani

Property is one of the most important instruments in this life, because wealth is as a support  for the continuity  of human life, in Islam it is always emphasized the importance of independence in owning property  through  work or business, because Allah really loves his servant who is always giving  alms with  his own property.  Allah Almighty really likes hard workers or people who are persistent in seeking treasure for the sake of the afterlife, even Allah SWT  emphasizes in  Surah at-taubah  father 10. And Say: "Work  for you, Then Allah and His Messenger and the believers  will see your work, and you will be returned to (Allah) who knows the unseen and the real, then He tells you what you have done. Even the  Companions of the Messenger  of  Allāh  adalah were rich people  who possessed  wealth  for  the progress and development of Islam  at the time, a  very real example was the Friends of Abu Bakr, Abdurrah bin ʻAuf, Uthman ibn Affan and the Wife of the Messenger of Allāh adalah was a great entrepreneur, Siti Khadijah. They are friends looking  for wealth and have it as much as possible then after that they distribute their wealth through ZISWAF, it is obligatory and must for Muslims  to seek / have property  for the benefit of the world and the hereafter and the interests of Muslims and provision  in  the hereafter Can be concluded that ownership of property in Islam  it is very important because it is a means of sustaining life and as a place to find savings  for ukhrawi life  later,  because indeed ownership of property in Islam  is  not only focused  on worldly matters, but there are  two elements  that are always included,  namely for  worldly  and spiritual interests. It  should be underlined in the ownership of the property  that the principle  must be instilled that this property has the absolute God Almighty, we are only temporarily entrusted, therefore it is not beautiful to not distribute the assets we have to people in need through ZISWAF instruments.  


Transilvania ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 53-59
Author(s):  
Carmen Oprișor

Vasile Aaron (1780-1821) had an important contribution to the modernization of the Romanian literature. He was also the representative of the Transylvanian Enlightenment School. One of his works which is worth mentioning is Reporta din vis (Reporta in his dream), a meditation upon the ephemeral human life. Here, the author brought in elements of novelty such as the “dream-in-a-dream” images, the pre-Romantic motif of the ruins or the first fantastic descriptions in the Romanian poetical works. All Aaron´s literary and social activity reflected the specific features of his age. The complete studies written by Liliana Popa and Nicolae Popa shed light upon Aaron’s life and work and they showed the real dimensions of his personality.


2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 391-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhida CHEN

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has, on various occasions, concluded treaties on behalf of its Member States. This raises some interesting questions: is ASEAN entitled to enter into treaties on behalf of its Member States; and if so, what should be the status of ASEAN and its Member States vis-à-vis the other party to the treaty? The issue is not one of whether the ASEAN Member States have consented to such a practice—it must be assumed that they have. Instead, the real issue is whether such treaty-making practice can and should be valid under international law, even if the Member States have consented for ASEAN to conclude these treaties on their behalf. This paper will argue that, under international law, ASEAN is entitled to conclude treaties on behalf of its Member States.


2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (8) ◽  
pp. 5-10
Author(s):  
S. M. Forkosh

The article analyzes the concept of simulators of J. Baudrillard in the context of the formation of a methodological toolkit for the research of contemporary culture. It is determined that attempts to consider the work of Baudrillard by certain stereotypes hide the fact that this philosopher, when creating models of the field of research, did not address the emerged methodological structures. The actual formation of a conceptual apparatus describing author’s models of the field of research turns methodological tools into signs that determine the field of Baudrillard’s research. One of the main conclusions that can be  made by exploring the Baudrillard concept is the provision of modern consumption as a consumption of signs and symbols that has lost touch with the pleasure of biologically based human needs. This process is called the desire of buyers to be identified. Baudrillard seeks to show that the signs themselves produce their referents and meanings. Moreover, the signs try to break with all meanings and references and to be closed only on interaction with each other. As a result, a real universe of signs appears and this sign-object machine seeks to absorb the «real» world. This is probably because language has always been a means of social control, and since in the era of globalization such exploitation of language has only intensified, now the signs are completely detached from their referents and the «era of simulation and simulacra» arises. The fundamental is discussing the evolution of the sign in its similarity with the evolutionary interpretation of labor. A «free» worker can produce only equivalences and a «free and emancipated sign» can only refer to equivalent values. That is why the philosopher determines the significance of the new European sign in the simulacrum of «nature» (the simulacrum of «nature» is regarded as the Idea of Nature). The problems of natural science and the metaphysics of reality are characteristic features of the entire bourgeoisie since the Renaissance.The principal role in the formation of Baudrillard’s conceptual representations belongs to language. The postmodern overcoming of the subject-object difference is realized by Baudrillard by appealing primarily to the linguistic or «sign» nature of reality. The object is transformed into an object-sign and as such, within the framework of the general theory of sign systems, becomes an encoded fragment whose main characteristic is not simply the stereotyped craving for «difference philosophy» but the subordination of the object system code to its totality. Objects appears from human life, and the life disappears as a subject, turning into a human-object, which like a thing, performing a certain function, appears in inter-human relations. Signed consumption covers the whole life of people, from consumption of things and ending with consumption of the environment of human life, which includes labor, leisure, culture, social sphere, nature. All this enters into human life in the form of consumed signs, «simulacrum», transforming it as a whole into a simulation, in the manipulation of signs. The sign, the «simulacrum,» indirectly helps a person to master reality, but at the same time he destroys the real, replaces it with himself. Therefore, it is impossible to distinguish reality from error, since a significant feature of our culture is that illusion, imitation or simulation is so deeply preserved in our lives that it makes impossible the distinction between the real world and the realm of the imagination. The position of the researcher that in the era of postmodernity the distinctions between true and false, authentic and unauthentic, real and unreal are disappearing, is one of the central in his works and indicates a possible vector of cultural development.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document