An Old Chief 's Lesson For His Son

Theme Statement: All civilized objects, activites, and souls, have inner savage which is held back by forced law, until power brings out the savage in everyone and everything.

In both of the passages, the characters ' intentions to build or justify their pride lead them to compromise or completely disregard on the qualities that make them a human and humane.

The `savage' people have a ritual of their own which has multi-purposes. The details of the ceremony involve a `sacrifice' where a boy gets whipped until he collapses in order to "please Pookong and Jesus." (117) Similar to the `civilized' society, this ceremony shows how the people of this society value community and stability. The boy getting whipped is willing to get beaten for the good of the people so that the land would be blessed

How does it feel to lose our dignity?  The meaning of dignity •

Throughout history, humans have utilized nonhuman animals for the benefit of mankind. This tendency increased as civilization developed, and presently, necessitated by staggering population growth and technological progress, human use of animals has skyrocketed. We eat them, we breed them, we use them as test subjects. Some people have begun to question the ethics of it all, sparking a debate on animal treatment and whether or not they have rights. In a paper on the subject, Carl Cohen lays out his definition of rights, explains their relationship with obligations, and uses these ideas to present the argument that manifests clearly in his piece’s title, “Why Animals Have No Rights”. THESIS

The notion of humanity is a picture intricately painted using the ideals and morals that define us as human beings in contextual society. The audience is influenced by the morals and values present through techniques in texts to paint their own image of humanity. Our ideals and morals that differ in texts through context, scrupulously shape our image of humanity

The principle of human dignity based on catholic social teaching is that every human being is the live image of a god himself (Australian Catholic Social Justice Council, 2016). therefore, every individual in our society is worth of respect as a member of the

The myth states that Aboriginal Peoples took the scalps of warriors and soldiers as trophies and prizes of war (Dolan). It is these myths and stereotypes that illustrate the Aboriginal Peoples as “savages”. The false information which they provide about their culture results in misleading ideas that are able to tear down their beliefs and values, shaping them into false prejudice, that dehumanize Indigenous People. “The complex process of dehumanizing Indians to justify taking away their land and culture...” as stated by Colin Calloway

Thinking of it gives me shivers as it implies that we are beings far greater than we imagined. And as good as it may sound, I think it appeals to man’s egotistic nature; we as humans who have done things, good and evil, try to look for a sound explanation to ease our consciences. I cannot say that the idea does not appeal to me yet I cannot also say that I do agree with it; on the other hand, of the three doctrines, I agree the most with the doctrine of The Noble Savage. I do believe that in our true nature, we are savages but that does not mean that we did not know how to control ourselves; indeed it would seem that the Native Americans, the specific race of people that the Europeans based the doctrine of The Noble Savage on, had a better society than we did: they were less barbaric, no employment problems and substance abuse, even crime was nearly nonexistent. And even if there were hard times, life was definitely stable and predictable. And yet that in itself was the reason why man chose to come out of his “savage” nature; he wanted adventure, twist and turns in his life; he wanted to feel the thrill of living. There is nothing wrong with that but for every choice there is a price to pay and the price we paid was high even if it remains to be seen

“Dignity is a state of physical, emotional and spiritual comfort, with each individual valued for his or her uniqueness and his or her individuality celebrated. Dignity is promoted when individuals are enabled to do the best within their capabilities, exercise control, make choices and feel involved in the decision-making that underpins their care.”

According to philosopher Thomas Hill, servility betrays the absence of a certain kind of self-respect. Servility is an excessive willingness to serve or please others even if it means hurting yourself. A servile person tends to deny moral rights to himself because he does not understand them or he has little concern for the status they give him. Hill uses an example of the Uncle Tom. This is a black man who always steps aside for men and does not complain if he gets the shorter end of the stick because he believes, as a black man, that is what he deserves. He accepts without question that because he is black he is owed less than whites, he has no ulterior motive in order to get revenge nor does he mock them behind their backs. He is not happy, but does not feel he deserves to be. However, servility is not just standing up for yourself. If Uncle Tom were not standing up for himself because he would lose his job and then not be able to feed his family, that doesn’t qualify as servility. Instead, servility is to have a certain attitude concerning one’s rightful place in the moral community.

Throughout history morality has been a topic of intense debate. Innumerable thinkers have devoted immense amounts of time and energy to the formulation of various ethical theories intended to assist humans in their daily lives. These theories set out guidelines which help to determine the rightness or wrongness of any given action and can therefore illuminate which choice would be morally beneficial. And while many of these theories differ substantially, most have at least one common underlying principle, namely that humans deserve to be treated with a certain level of respect. This idea comes from the belief that all humans have interests which are significant enough to be considered, hence no one should impede another

4, pp. 69 ff.), "Humanism recognizes the value and dignity of man and makes him the measure of all things or somehow takes human nature, its limits, or its interests as its theme."

The notion of human nature has always been historically debated. Explores, philosophers, and writers have always come to argue on what is considered to be barbarism, savagery, and civilized. These constructed categories have put a label on people who do not share the same ideas as one another. These different views of human nature have come to propel change and have come to revolutionized human history. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Michel de Montaigne, and Thomas Hobbes all differ on their ideas of human nature, but they also share common ground. For some of these men the practices of different cultures are categorized as savagery, and for others it has been viewed as noble savagery. Their ideas however have allowed society to view different perspectives of human nature. These perspectives have classified human nature as a way of life, or as an obstacle to what is consider to be the good life. Their ethnographic resources provide a glimpse to all the different cultures and their value to society and history.

The idea of human dignity has been remarked and articulated in a number of the jurisprudence works of the mid-twentieth American legal philosopher, Lon L. Fuller. The Morality of Law, for instance, provides a valuable snapshot of Fuller’s preliminary sense of what his idea on human dignity might entail. In the core of his argument of legal morality, Fuller proposes that any neglect of eight principles of legality, which constitutes the internal morality of law, is not just only render the rational ground to obey the law and destroy the trusteeship between lawgiver and subject, but it further condemns and humiliates the dignity of person or human being as a free and responsible agent, self-determining center of action, and that they possess inherent dignity. In other important text, Fuller explicitly announces that the value of human dignity, over other extra-legal values, that must embodied within the structure of legal order. After he offers a long discussion of human capacity of action and communication under the forms of order, he writes: “ there is, therefore, in an ordered system of law, formulated and administered conscientiously, a certain built-in respect for human dignity, and I think it is reasonable to suppose that this respect will tend to carry over into the substantive ends of law.” Thirdly, in his draft essay Means and Ends, which can be considered both as an introductory of Fuller’s eunmoics theory of social order and Fuller’s reflection on the