民法视角下的休息权

休息权为自然人维护其独立人格所必需,且不为其他任何一项人格权所包容,因而是一项独立的人格权。在休息权所包含的全部内容中,休假权和休闲权是主要为劳动者享有的带有劳动福利性质的权利,是对劳动者剩余劳动的一种报偿,而休闲权还具有社会公共福利的性质。因此,休整权、安宁权是人格权,而休假权和休闲权则不是。作为人格权的休息权的主体是自然人,而不限于劳动者。法律应明确规定休息权为自然人的一项人格权,明确列举自然人享有休息权的范围,并明确规定侵犯休息权的法律责任。     

论两种不同的残疾人观

本文在对新、旧两种不同的残疾人观比较研究的基础上,着重探讨了新残疾人观的基本内容 、形成条件、研究意义以及判断新、旧残疾人观的客观标准。     

孤寂的心灵 自尊的生活——论海明威《一个干净明亮的地方》的主题

本文通过分析探讨美国作家海明威的短篇小说《一个干净明亮的地方》的主题来揭示作者深刻的思想意蕴。海明威把孤独和空虚视为现代生活的主要悲剧,认为面对这个充满“虚无缥缈”的社会,人类需要光亮和秩序来重新确立生活的自尊,这种自尊就是生活的勇气,人类用它来战胜那可怕的精神危机。     

Philosophy and profound disability: learning from experience

Reflection on profound and multiple learning difficulties and disabilities raises a series of questions in moral and political philosophy, a claim supported by philosophical argument but also given credence by human testimony, some examples of which are presented here. I introduce three young people with profound learning disabilities, before presenting testimony on their behalf, organised so as to coincide with a series of related philosophical questions about human dignity, respect, citizenship and dependency. I suggest that there are implications that apply to all people and not only to those with profound learning difficulties.     

马克思尊严观的“否定”论域及其实践智慧

马克思的尊严观是马克思关于人的尊严的构想、理论和学说的总称.马克思从尊严的“否定”方面,即“尊严缺失”出发来阐释尊严,揭示了尊严普遍缺失的社会根源,强调在“挣得尊严”这一意义上为绝大多数人的尊严实现创造必要的社会条件.这是一种以现实个人的尊严为目的的现实主义尊严观,它既克服了尊严本身的抽象性和理想性,又为人们追求并获得尊严指明了实践对象和未来方向,鼓舞人们以消除尊严普遍缺失为直接目标.在日常生活中,马克思主义尊严观给予我们实践智慧与方法论原则,在克服、消除日常生活中实际存在的人的尊严缺失的实践过程中,实实在在地奠定谋求“尊严生活”的坚实基础.     

The Syrian corpse: the politics of dignity in visual and media representations of the Syrian revolution*

This essay explores the material, phenomenological and political meaning of the Syrian corpse and the question of its dignity as represented in a series of media and visual outputs from 2011 to the present. The essay begins by arguing that the violence in Syria now targets the dead as much as the living. As such, the essay highlights the forms of ‘necroviolence’ that the Syrian corpse has been subjected to: mistreatment, erasure of markers of identity, denial of burial, mutilation and ultimately an attempt to erase it from memory. The essay concludes by arguing that the Syrian corpse is not merely the passive subject or victim of ‘necroviolence’ but can also become the paradoxical agent of what we might call ‘postmortem resistance’.     

人格尊严视角下代孕技术的伦理审视

目前我国对代孕技术采取全面禁止的态度是伦理学界争议较大的问题之一。生育和人类的繁衍作为人类基本的一项权利,应当在社会中得到尊重,得到法律的保护。文章从“人格尊严”的视角出发,对代孕技术中涉及的委托父母、代孕母亲进行伦理审视和研究,从其人格尊严的价值层面寻找对代孕技术在计划生育政策条件下有限开放的伦理论证。     

尊严的本质与当代中国人尊严的实现

过有尊严的生活,是人类孜孜不倦的追求。什么是尊严?如何让人们过上有尊严的生活?是古今中外学者和政治家们长期探索的课题。随着温饱问题的解决,当代中国人对尊严实现的需求越来越强烈。引导人们正确理解和把握尊严的本质,分析当代人尊严的基本诉求,探讨其实现的方法和途径,不断满足人们尊严实现的需求,是落实以人为本思想的体现,也是构建和谐社会的需要。     

我们时代的根本精神

所谓时代精神,就是一个时代的根本精神。我们的时代精神就是"非实体性"。在哲学上它表现为对于传统的实体——绝对理念、上帝、本原等实体以及永恒等实体性的解构;在政治上则意味着对于王权的解构,世袭制、集权制逐渐解体,而代之以非实体性的制度——民主制。民主的实质是对话、协商,只有在对话中才有真理,才有正义,也才有人的尊严和个人的权利可言。     

Conceptualising dignity in the context of social security: Bottom-up and top-down perspectives

Dignity and social security have been closely associated since at least the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, but there is a lack of clarity around what dignity means in this context. This article explores how two key stakeholders—out-of-work benefit recipients and policymakers—understand dignity in the context of social security, drawing on qualitative research with each group. The evidence presented notes a relative absence of direct references to dignity among policymakers, although related issues are nonetheless discussed, whereas benefit recipients commonly articulate experiences of undignified treatment and the negative impact this has on their lives. This article's exploration of dignity is of particular relevance to Scotland, where recent framework legislation includes the principle that their security system should be underpinned by “respect for the dignity of individuals.” The authors propose that a social security system that protects dignity must take account of distributional, relational, and intrinsic aspects of dignity—providing sufficient income, treating users with respect, and avoiding interventions or discourses that are disrespectful and dehumanizing. Further, the authors question whether it is possible for dignity to enjoy meaningful protection within highly disciplinary conditional welfare regimes.