What We Get Wrong About Human Dignity

"Things have a price. Price means that something can be exchanged, substituted, or replaced with an equivalent. Persons, however, have "inner worth" or dignity. Persons are not interchangeable or replaceable; they have no equivalent. A person is an end in themselves, not a means to an end, and should not be used as a means to an end. A person is not a means for parents to live through,"

"We also tend to misinterpret it. We have confused it with earned respect. 1 We have confused it with charity. We have confused it with winning and wealth. We have reduced it to a sentiment, a vibe, a line on a corporate values poster, right between " innovation" and "synergy." But unless dignity is reflected in humans being treated as beings of unconditional worth, that values poster has nothing to do with real dignity. It is just decoration."

"The first and most consequential error is that we treat dignity as though it were a reward. A performance bonus, earned, chased after, and doled out to those who have demonstrated sufficient productivity. Grabbed along with power. The logic runs like this: You have proven your value; therefore, you deserve to be treated as fully human. Wait, what? Why should humans earn being treated like humans?"

Humans instinctively crave dignity but often misinterpret it as earned respect, charity, wealth, or corporate sentiment. Dignity is inherent to every person and cannot legitimately be treated as a reward or prize. Kantian distinction shows that things have price and are interchangeable, while persons possess inner worth and are ends in themselves, not means to other ends. Niceness without honesty can corrode dignity rather than protect it. Real dignity must be embedded in systems and structures that recognize unconditional human worth and ensure people are treated as ends, not instruments for others’ goals.

Read at Psychology Today