Search

Although human dignity has been the focus of many researchers, fundamental debates about its existence have often been ignored. Different views on human dignity and its existence can lead to divergent interpretations of human rights. In this study, we attempted to find an answer to the question of the nature of human dignity by examining and collecting the opinions of experts and analyzing and criticizing them. Our analysis showed that since dignity is linked to human existence and understanding, it has a subjective nature. Subjective existences have different types, including contractual and abstract. Contractual existence finds its way to objective entities through human thought, and it is changeable. An abstract existence, on the other hand, is created by perception of an objective entity in a constant way among human beings. Human dignity is consistent with the contractual type, because simply seeing a human does not bring to mind the existence of dignity and human rights. Once we accept the contractual nature of dignity, we must determine who bestowed this dignity on man. Through investigations, we came to the conclusion that God is the only one that can grant such privilege, and the existence of dignity for humans is a proof of God's existence.

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.

Research on human dignity is crucial for understanding the ethical foundations of human rights. Neglecting to address certain pitfalls in this area of research can lead to adverse effects, including the perpetuation of discrimination, the misrepresentation of dignity across different schools of thought, and the weakening of ethical standards in human rights discourse. The present study aims to identify such challenges by analytically examining outstanding research in this field. Our surveys have identified challenges and pitfalls that were categorized into two groups: challenges in the field of materials, and challenges in the field of methods. In terms of materials, researchers may fail to adequately consider the historical and cultural contexts that shape these views, while in terms of methods, they may overlook the diverse perspectives that contribute to a comprehensive understanding of dignity. Consequently, it is imperative for researchers to remain vigilant and avoid these pitfalls to ensure that their work upholds the true essence of human dignity and effectively advocates for the rights of all individuals, especially those from marginalized backgrounds.

Background & Aims The ethical challenges of pediatric nurses in the work environment is inevitable. One of these challenges for nurses is related to euthanasia, which is affected by extensive legal, religious, and cultural issues. This study aims to determine the relationship between ethical reasoning and attitudes towards euthanasia in nurses working in children’s hospitals. Materials & Methods This descriptive-analytical study was conducted on 194 pediatric nurses working in two children’s hospitals affiliated to Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Data were collected electronically and in person using three questionnaires, including a demographic form, the nursing dilemma test (NDT), and the euthanasia attitude survey (EAS). The collected data were analyzed in SPSS software, version 26. Results The mean score of ethical reasoning was 42.92±10.33, and the mean score of EAS was 2.65±0.12. The ethical reasoning score had no significant correlation with age, work experience, sex, marital status, education level, and history of participation in nursing ethics courses, except for the department, which was significantly related to ethical reasoning. The EAS score had no significant correlation with any of the demographic variables, except for the department. The Pearson correlation test results indicated a significant negative correlation between ethical reasoning and attitudes toward euthanasia (r=-0.60, P