This paper seeks to examine the concept of inherent dignity of man in relation to the traditional paradigm of human dominion over the creation and its impact on sustainable development.
The first part of the paper deals with the concept of inherent dignity in international and regional human rights instruments. In the second part of the paper, I shall discuss the concept of dignifying all other creature as an alternative paradigm to protect the environment. And the third part shall focus on the concept of human dignity and human dominion over all other creation in the light of the Holy Quran and other sources of Islamic jurisprudence. Finally, the paper concludes that human dignity is a foundational notion that can theoretically contribute to the justification of human rights and it is not in contradiction with other religious instructions that define Man's relationship with God's creation. However, ecotheology is only one factor among many other elements that should contribute to the study of the contemporary ecological crisis.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Rejectionists’ Claim
3. Inclusivists’ Claim
4. Exclusivists’ Approach
5. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper examines the concept of inherent human dignity in relation to the traditional paradigm of human dominion over creation and its subsequent impact on sustainable development, arguing for an Islamic perspective that balances human rights with ecological stewardship.
- The theoretical foundations of human dignity in international human rights instruments.
- Critiques of the anthropocentric paradigm and its role in the contemporary ecological crisis.
- Comparative analysis of religious approaches to human dignity and dominion.
- The Islamic concepts of Amana (stewardship) and human dignity as a framework for environmental protection.
Excerpt from the Book
2. Rejectionists’ Claim
The concerns expressed focus on whether human dignity is a right like other human rights or, as stated in the preamble of both international covenants on human rights, it constitutes the very foundation of human rights. The idea that dignity means being human is not of recent origin, and it is perhaps the great German philosopher, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) who has come up with the most appropriate philosophical explanation of the term “human dignity”. He asserted that: “In the kingdom of ends everything has either a price or a dignity. What has a price can be replaced by something else as its equivalent; what on the other hand is above all price and therefore admits of no equivalent has a dignity”.
Kant emphasizes that morality is the condition under which a rational being can be an end in itself and this condition originates from dignity: “What is related to general human inclinations and needs has a market price;… but 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. Now, morality is the condition under which a rational being can be an end in itself, since only through this is it possible to be a lawgiving member in the kingdom of ends. Hence morality and humanity insofar as it is capable of morality, is that which alone has dignity.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter establishes the concept of inherent human dignity as the foundation of international human rights while highlighting the growing philosophical and ecological controversy surrounding its anthropocentric interpretation.
2. Rejectionists’ Claim: This section explores arguments from scholars who view human dignity as a vaguely defined, historically contingent concept that has contributed to the current ecological crisis by justifying human exploitation of nature.
3. Inclusivists’ Claim: This chapter discusses ecological perspectives that seek to dismantle the anthropocentric paradigm by attributing dignity to all creations, drawing on examples such as Hindu beliefs regarding the sanctity of life.
4. Exclusivists’ Approach: This section presents the author's alternative framework, which reconciles human dignity with environmental responsibility through the Islamic concepts of stewardship and accountability.
5. Conclusion: The final chapter summarizes that human dignity is not inherently contradictory to environmental protection, positing that Islamic teachings define humans as responsible guardians of God’s creation.
Keywords
human dignity, sustainable development, ecology, ecotheology, anthropocentrism, Amana, stewardship, human rights, Islamic jurisprudence, environment, moral responsibility, creation, theology, ethics, religion.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The paper explores the relationship between the concept of human dignity, the traditional paradigm of human dominion over creation, and the resulting implications for sustainable development.
What are the primary thematic areas addressed?
The work covers human rights discourse, environmental ethics, religious traditions (specifically Abrahamic and Islamic), and the philosophical critique of anthropocentrism.
What is the central research question?
The paper seeks to determine how the notion of human dignity can be harmonized with ecological preservation rather than serving as a justification for the exploitation of the natural world.
What scientific methodology is employed?
The author utilizes a descriptive and analytical approach, synthesizing legal instruments, philosophical texts, and religious jurisprudence to evaluate competing paradigms of human-nature relationships.
What is discussed in the main body of the text?
The main body critiques the "rejectionist" and "inclusivist" views on human dignity and proposes an "exclusivist" Islamic perspective that frames humans as stewards (vicegerents) of the earth.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include human dignity, sustainable development, ecology, ecotheology, anthropocentrism, and Amana (stewardship).
How does the author interpret the term "Amana" within the context of the environment?
Amana refers to the "Trust" or stewardship that humans have assumed, implying a responsibility to protect the planet, for which they will be held accountable on the Day of Judgment.
How does the Islamic approach differ from the Judeo-Christian view regarding nature?
While acknowledging shared roots, the author argues that the Quranic perspective shifts the focus from simple dominion to the concept of Amana, emphasizing duty and guardianship over exploitation.
- Quote paper
- Mohammad Hossein Mozaffari (Author), 2014, Dignity, dominion and development. An islamic approach to sustainable development, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1021473
