Skip to main content
Log in

Two Concepts of Dignity for Humans and Non-Human Organisms in the Context of Genetic Engineering

  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The 1992 incorporation of an article by referendum in the SwissConstitution mandating that the federal government issue regulations onthe use of genetic material that take into account the dignity ofnonhuman organism raises philosophical questions about how we shouldunderstand what is meant by ``the dignity of nonhuman animals,'' andabout what sort of moral demands arise from recognizing this dignitywith respect to their genetic engineering. The first step in determiningwhat is meant is to clarify the difference between dignity when appliedto humans and when applied to nonhumans. Several conceptions of humandignity should be rejected in favor of a fourth conception: the rightnot to be degraded. This right implies that those who have it have thecognitive capacities that are prerequisite for self-respect. In the caseof nonhuman organisms that lack this capacity, respecting their dignityrequires the recognition that their inherent value, which is tied totheir abilities to pursue their own good, be respected. This value isnot absolute, as it is in the case of humans, so it does not prohibitbreeding manipulations that make organisms more useful to humans. But itdoes restrict morally how sentient animals can be used. In regard togenetic engineering, this conception requires that animals be allowedthe uninhibited development of species specific functions, a positionshared by Holland and Attfield, as opposed to the Original Purposeconception proposed by Fox and the Integrity of the Genetic Make-upposition proposed by Rolston. The inherent value conception of dignity,as here defended, is what is meant in the Swiss Constitution article.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Attfield, R., “Genetic Engineering: Can Unnatural Kinds be Wronged?” in P. Wheale and R. McNally (eds.), Animal Genetic Engineering: Of Pigs, Oncomice and Men (Pluto Press, London, 1995), pp. 201-210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayertz, K., “Human Dignity: Philosophical Origin and Scientific Erosion of an Idea,” in K. Bayertz (ed.), Sanctity of Life and Human Dignity (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1996), pp. 73-90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedau, H. A., “The Eighth Amendement, Dignity, and the Death Penalty,” in M. J. Meyer and W. A. Parent (eds.), The Constitution of Rights. Human Dignity and American Values (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1992), pp. 145-177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birnbacher, D., “Ambiguities in the Concept of Menschenwürde,” in K. Bayertz (ed.), Sanctity of Life and Human Dignity (Kluwer, Dordrecht 1996), pp. 107-122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bericht der Ethik-Studienkommission des Eidgenössischen Volkswirtschaftsdepartements zur Gentechnologie im ausserhumanen Bereich (Bern, 1995).

  • Cavalieri, P. and P. Singer (eds.), The Great Ape Project. Equality Beyond Humanity (Fourth Estate, London, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavalieri, P., “Etica and Animali: Special Issue Devoted to the Great Ape Project,” Etica and Animali 8 (1996).

  • Cheney, D. L. and R. M. Seyfarth, How Monkeys See the World. Inside the Mind of Another Species (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, A., “Biocentrism and Genetic Engineering,” Environmental Values 4 (1995), 227-239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, J., “The Nature and Value of Rights,” in Feinberg, Rights, Justice, and the Bounds of Liberty (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1980), pp. 143-158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M., “Transgenic Animals: Ethical and Animal Welfare Concerns,” in P. Wheale and R. McNally (eds.), The Bio Revolution, Cornucopia or Pandora's Box? (Pluto Press, London, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gewirth, A., “Human Dignity as the Basis of Rights,” in M. Meyer and W. A. Parent (eds.), The Constitution of Rights. Human Dignity and American Values (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1992), pp. 10-28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, A., “The Biotic Community: A Philosophical Critique of Genetic Engineering,” in P. Wheale and R. McNally (eds.), The Bio Revolution, Cornucopia or Pandora' Box (Pluto Press, London, 1990), pp. 166-174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I., Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (translated by H. J. Patton, 1964) (Harper and Row Publishers, London, 1785).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, R., The Significance of Free Will (Oxford University Press, New York, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Massey, St., “Is Self-Respect a Moral or a Psychological Concept?” Ethics 93 (1983), 246-241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, S., “Environmental Threats of Transgenic Technology,” in P. Wheale and R. McNally (eds.), Animal Genetic Engineering: Of Pigs, Oncomice and Men (Pluto Press, London, 1995), pp. 125-132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M., “Introduction,” in M. Meyer and W. A. Parent (eds.), The Constitution of Rights. Human Dignity and American Values (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1992), pp. 1-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parent, W. A., “Constitutional Values and Human Dignity,” in M. Meyer and W. A. Parent (eds.), The Constitution of Rights. Human Dignity and American Values (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1992), pp. 47-72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, F. and W. Gordon, “The Case for the Personhood of Gorillas,” in P. Cavalieri and P. Singer (eds.), The Great Ape Project. Equality beyond Humanity (Fourth Estate, London, 1993), pp. 58-79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perret, R. W., “Valuing Lives,” Bioethics 6 (1992), 185-200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Praetorius, I. and P. Saladin, Die Würde der Kreatur (Art. 24 novies Abs.3 BV).

  • Schriftenreihe Umwelt Nr. 260 (Bern: BUWAL, Bern, 1996). Regan, T., The Case for Animal Rights (Routledge and Kegan, London, 1983).

  • Reiss, M. R. Straughan, Improving Nature? The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rollin, B. E., The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolston, H. III, Environmental Ethics (Temple University Press, Philadelphia, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolston, H. III, “Environmental Ethics: Values in and Duties to the Natural World,” in F. Bormann and S. Kellert (eds.), Ecology, Economics, Ethics (Yale University Press, New Haven, 1992), pp. 73-96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rust, A., Transgene Tiere. Ñberlegungen aus ethischer Perspektive (Gen Suisse, Bern, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schöne-Seifert, B., “Philosophische Ñberlegungen zu 'Menschenwürde' und Fortpflanzungsmedizin,” Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 44 (1990), 442-473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweizer, R. P. Saladin, “Kommentar zu Art. 24novies,” in J. F. Aubert et al. (eds.), Kommentar zur Bundesverfassung der Schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft (Helbling and Lichtenhahn, Basel, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sitter-Liver, B., “Würde der Kreatur. Grundlegung, Bedeutung, Funktion eines neuen Verfassungsprinzips,” in J. Nida-Rümelin and D. von der Pfordten (eds.), Ökologische Ethik und Rechtstheorie (Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, Baden-Baden, 1996), pp. 355-364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F., Beyond Freedom and Dignity (Jonathan Cape, London, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaemann, R., “Ñber den Begriff der Menschenwürde,” in E. Böckenförde and R. Spaemann (eds.), Menschenrechte und Menschenwürde (Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart, 1987), pp. 295-313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumner, L. W., Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. W., Respect for Nature (Princeton Uniersity Press, Princeton, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  • Westra, L., “ 'Respect,' 'Dignity' and 'Integrity': An Environmental Proposal for Ethics,” Epistemologia 12 (1989), 91-123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westra, L., An Environmental Proposal for Ethics. The Principle of Integrity (Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, J.-C., “Die Würde der menschlichen Zygote,” in H. Ganthaler and O. Neumaier (eds.), Anfang und Ende des Lebens (Academia, Sankt Augustin, 1997), pp. 37-71.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Balzer, P., Rippe, K.P. & Schaber, P. Two Concepts of Dignity for Humans and Non-Human Organisms in the Context of Genetic Engineering. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13, 7–27 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009536230634

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009536230634

Navigation