“人格化原则”取消的代价与责任者的观点

刘静

PDF
Cite
Share

facebook

twitter

google

linkedin

May 2023

Article Contents

Citation: Jing LIU. The Cost of Abandoning the Personification Principle and the Perspective of the Responsible Person[J]. Academic Monthly, 2023, 55(3): 35-44, 139. shu

The Cost of Abandoning the Personification Principle and the Perspective of the Responsible Person

Jing LIU

Abstract

The revolution in biotechnology has redefined “human life” but challenges traditional philosophical thinking about what a human being is, and Kant’s proposition that “human being is the end” faces difficulties and challenges. How does Kant’s theory of dignity based on rationalism accommodate the new ethical identity, and how to justify “moral status of nonrational beings” have become new problems for ethics. Within the framework of Kant’s deontological ethics, Wood breaks the dichotomy between “person” and “thing” by reconstructing the value theory of the formula of humanity, completes the extended argument for the transition from “human being is the end”to “thing is the end” under the concept of logocentrism, and finally introduces the “the moral status of nonrational beings” and the “the direct duties regarding animals”. However, Wood’s reconstruction and expansion of the value theory is at the expense of abandoning the personification principle, which causes the separation of humanity and personality and weakens the moral subject status of the responsible person. In fact, on Kant’s view, “human being is the end” is a “moral imperative” that does not depend on the premise of value theory. Freedom and dignity are first a “duty”, not a “value” or “right”. Therefore, we have to hold on to the foundation of human dignity and nature of human freedom, insist on a “the responsible person” perspective, and construct and expand the horizon of ethical concerns based on the constructivism of duty. This paper will defend the “dignity of nonrational human beings” and justify a “strong” indirect duties regarding animals.
- dignity,
- humanity,
- personality,
- animality,
- the responsible person
References
Access
1. [1]
  Jing LIU . Gene Editing and Human Dignity. Academic Monthly, 2021, 53(9): 28-37.
2. [2]
  . . Academic Monthly, 2017, 49(04): 28-41.
3. [3]
  Shaobin BIAN . Dignity and Necessity: Wood on Kant’s Ethical Thoughts. Academic Monthly, 2021, 53(6): 31-44.
4. [4]
  Yuhong HU . Reasonable Partition: The Necessary Separating Space in Maintaining Human Dignity. Academic Monthly, 2021, 53(12): 106-120.
5. [5]
  . . Academic Monthly, 2017, 49(08): 18-29.
6. [6]
  . . Academic Monthly, 2017, 49(07): 68-77.
7. [7]
  Zhongqi WANG . Dispatched Responsibilty: An Effective Mechanism of Responsive Government Construction. Academic Monthly, 2022, 54(11): 84-95, 120.
8. [8]
  Jing RAO . The Personification Dynamic of Aesthetic Education. Academic Monthly, 2021, 53(9): 159-167.
9. [9]
  , . . Academic Monthly, 2016, 48(03): 176-184.
10. [10]
  Dachun YANG . From Phenomenology of Spirituality to Phenomenology of Materiality. Academic Monthly, 2022, 54(1): 25-33.
11. [11]
  Huiyong ZHANG . On Kantian Deontological Theories in Animal Ethics. Academic Monthly, 2020, 52(8): 56-66, 82.
12. [12]
  TIAN XIAO . Ma Rufei’s Legends and the Generating of Modern Storytellers’ Ideal Personality. Academic Monthly, 2019, 51(3): 171-184.
13. [13]
  Yuan GAO . Interaction of the Ideal Humanity: The New Interpretation of Augustine in Finnish School and Its Encounter with Chinese Philosophy. Academic Monthly, 2021, 53(9): 38-48.
14. [14]
  GAO Song . From Animal to AI—— A Phenomenological Investigation into Various Forms of Meaning-understanding. Academic Monthly, 2023, 55(11): 15-27.
15. [15]
  Xianqing ZHANG , Changyi LIU . From “Others” to “Citizens”. Academic Monthly, 2018, 50(12): 142-152.
16. [16]
  Zhong LIU . Defender from the Revolution. Academic Monthly, 2021, 53(6): 121-136.
17. [17]
  . . Academic Monthly, 2017, 49(03): 81-90.
18. [18]
  Keyun ZHANG , Min LIU . Media Concern and Corporate Social Responsibility Performance. Academic Monthly, 2021, 53(9): 57-71.
19. [19]
  , , . . Academic Monthly, 2016, 48(03): 37-47.
20. [20]
  Hong MA , Zhimin WANG . The Designing Principles of Legal System of Environmental Pollution Liability Insurance. Academic Monthly, 2022, 54(11): 96-106.

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Entire Issue PDF

Article Metrics

Article views: 309 Times PDF downloads: 1 Times Cited by: 0 Times

Metrics

PDF Downloads(1)
Abstract views(309)
HTML views(49)

Latest
Most Read
Most Cited

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

The Cost of Abandoning the Personification Principle and the Perspective of the Responsible Person

Jing LIU

Available Online: 2023-03-20

Abstract: The revolution in biotechnology has redefined “human life” but challenges traditional philosophical thinking about what a human being is, and Kant’s proposition that “human being is the end” faces difficulties and challenges. How does Kant’s theory of dignity based on rationalism accommodate the new ethical identity, and how to justify “moral status of nonrational beings” have become new problems for ethics. Within the framework of Kant’s deontological ethics, Wood breaks the dichotomy between “person” and “thing” by reconstructing the value theory of the formula of humanity, completes the extended argument for the transition from “human being is the end”to “thing is the end” under the concept of logocentrism, and finally introduces the “the moral status of nonrational beings” and the “the direct duties regarding animals”. However, Wood’s reconstruction and expansion of the value theory is at the expense of abandoning the personification principle, which causes the separation of humanity and personality and weakens the moral subject status of the responsible person. In fact, on Kant’s view, “human being is the end” is a “moral imperative” that does not depend on the premise of value theory. Freedom and dignity are first a “duty”, not a “value” or “right”. Therefore, we have to hold on to the foundation of human dignity and nature of human freedom, insist on a “the responsible person” perspective, and construct and expand the horizon of ethical concerns based on the constructivism of duty. This paper will defend the “dignity of nonrational human beings” and justify a “strong” indirect duties regarding animals.

HTML

Relative (20)

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Return

The Cost of Abandoning the Personification Principle and the Perspective of the Responsible Person

Abstract

References

Access

Article Metrics

Metrics

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

The Cost of Abandoning the Personification Principle and the Perspective of the Responsible Person

HTML

目录