Contemplating on human dignity: who counts as human?

Seyed Abdosaleh  Jafari; Nafiseh  Tavasoli; Hanieh  Tavasoli; Soheil  abedi; Ahmad  Fayaz-Bakhsh; Behin  araminia

doi:10.18502/jmehm.v17i5.17104

Seyed Abdosaleh Jafari Researcher, University of Religions and Denominations, Research Center for Religions and Denominations; Researcher, Medical Ethics and History of Medicine Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Nafiseh Tavasoli Researcher, Endocrine and Metabolism Research Institute, Endocrine and Metabolism Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Hanieh Tavasoli Resident of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Soheil abedi PhD Candidate in Medical Ethics, Medical Ethics and History of Medicine Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ahmad Fayaz-Bakhsh Researcher, Sina Trauma & Surgery Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Behin araminia Researcher, Mental Health Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/jmehm.v17i5.17104

Keywords: Humans; Consciousness; Personal autonomy; Human identification; Human species; Species identification.

Abstract

The fundamental topic in humanities is clearly the study of humans. Neglecting the understanding and recognition of humans can hinder us from achieving generalizable results and may lead us toward arbitrary and group-based decisions. Failure to distinguish between biological species up to the point of denying the objectivity of species, conflicts between nominalists and realists, and limitations of logical definitions are problems that will be addressed in this article.
In this study, it is argued that there is no universal definition for human beings as a biological species. Therefore, from a philosophical perspective, the rights and characteristics that are associated with humans in humanities cannot be attributed to human beings as a mere biological species. In an attempt to settle this issue, a minimal shared definition of “human” (as a philosophical entity) that encompasses differences and exceptions has been accepted and recognized.
It is evident that an attachment cannot stand on the same level as the essence, and discussions regarding their incorporation should be considered.
In this article, it has been concluded that the criteria for the philosophical human are self-awareness and freedom of choice, and offering a definition for “human” will be founded on these two features.