Human Dignity and Cyber Space
Introduction
Human dignity refers to the status human beings are entitled to in order to be respected as worthy, honorable, noble and equal members of the community. Through human dignity, people are able to feel liked, valued, loved, equal, and inalienable human beings. Thus, human dignity is a universal affirmation that human beings ought to receive the highest value with regards to space and time (Krishnamurti, 2014). Human dignity also confirms that people are important. As a result, they should be allowed to enjoy and uphold civil, legal, and human rights ensuring individuals are respected and valued (Christopher, 2008). Discussing human dignity however can involve diverse concepts. Thus, it is important to discuss human dignity based on a particular framework or concept. This research will therefore discuss human dignity in relation to cyberspaces. The research will apply four diverse perspectives.
The first perspective will define human dignity in order to affirm cyber bullying is an unethical internet activity. Cyber bullying does not value free speech as it relies on this right to impinge on human dignity. The second perspective will affirm cyberspaces can harm human dignity among persons with a low self esteem and image. Thus, it will seek to emphasize that vulnerable persons ought to be resilient in order to maintain their human dignity by responding to incidences of cyber bullying in order to boost their self-worth (Trope & Gaunt, 2007). The third perspective describing human dignity is based on the mentality maintained by cyber bullies and the reports portraying their activities through mass media (Christopher, 2008). It will seek to emphasize that, trolling and denouncing vulnerable victims of cyber bullying through the mass media tarnishes their human dignity. This report will therefore affirm that, human beings are born with human dignity. As a result, people should uphold it while relying on freedom of speech without utilizing cyberspaces to diminish human dignity among friends and family members (Bryce & James, 2013).
Types of Human Dignity
The first type of human dignity is based on the belief that, it something people all human beings possess through birth. This is based on David Kirchhoffers’ talk with regards to human dignity. For example, religious beliefs affirm human beings were created in the image of God. Thus, all human beings should be dignified. Conversely, some non-religious claims also argue human dignity is a natural factor favoring people to survive in their own species for each to acquire a special worth and intrinsic value over other species (Green, Preston & Janmaat, 2006).
The second category is based on the understanding that, human dignity is something human beings either acquire or lose. This process can occur based on an individual’s feelings of self worth and esteem and behaviors either bestowing or removing the human dignity. For example, people can be a sense of pride based on an individual’s consciousness to their self-worth as human beings leading meaningful lives worth respect from others. However, human beings can also be in compromising and humiliating positions threatening to remove the human dignity (Mette, 2002).
Rationally thinking human beings should therefore possess human capacities ensuring they bestow human beings among others. They should utilize their freedoms, conscience, autonomy and moral ethics with love to ensure human species are uniquely dignified. However, some social attitudes, norms and circumstances can hinder the process of bestowing human dignity among others. This statement therefore affirms that, cyber bullying is an issue removing the critical factors enhancing human dignity (Tarrant, 2015).
Perspectives of Human Dignity
The first perspective discusses human dignity in relation to freedom of speech and David Kirchhoffers’ argument. Examining this perspective involves evaluating how human beings utilize freedom of speech to either remove or bestow human dignity. The concept of human dignity affected by freedom of speech is based on the fact that mass media greatly influence self-worth and esteem among human beings (David, 2015). For example, some mass media reports can place certain individuals in an embarrassing and humiliating situation. This is especially due to the advancing technologies expanding types and uses of cyberspaces. A report posted through Facebook placing a human being in a humiliating position or condition adversely affects the victim’s human dignity. This is because a large number of other human beings watch or read the cyber text or video and judge him/her without inherent dignity. Others can result to torture. For example, individuals can post rude remarks offending the individual’s human dignity (Dredge, John & Xochitl-de- la, 2014).
This is because human beings rely on freedom of speech to post humiliating, embarrassing and hurtful videos or messages through cyberspace to remove the victim’s human dignity. Thus, the social attitudes, norms and circumstances influencing activities by mass media relying on freedom of speech can remove or bestow human dignity among community members. Global societies should therefore acknowledge attitudes while relating with human beings influence human dignity. For example, an individual with a negative social attitude cannot bestow human dignity while communicating and relating with another person with a low self esteem as the latter is bound to feel worthless due to the low self-confidence. Consequently, social norms relying on freedom of speech to remove human dignity should be discouraged. Circumstances bestowing human dignity such as use of social media to entertain without attacking another person’s self-worth and value should be encouraged. Ultimately, freedom of speech should not be used to especially through cyberspaces to remove human dignity. Instead, it should be used to promote peace, unity and cohesion among global communities through cyberspaces (Green, Preston & Janmaat, 2006).
The second perspective also discusses human dignity in relation to cyber bullying based on David Kirchhoffers’ argument. This is based on cultural and religious beliefs bestowing human dignity among human beings from diverse backgrounds. For example, terrorists are brought up to in cultural beliefs based on false religious arguments justifying the killing of innocent victims. Thus, all terrorists lack human conscientiousness and consciousness ensuring they respect and treat all human beings as respectable, honorable, and worthy individuals. Instead, they rely on the religious and cultural arguments to remove human dignity (David, 2015).
Their social attitudes are influenced by the norms of killing innocent souls and damaging peaceful societies living harmoniously while bestowing human dignity. For example, when terrorists bomb a community, such a circumstance does not bestow human dignity among the affected human beings. Instead, it removes human dignity as the terrorists rely on false, immoral, and unethical beliefs to abuse the rights and social values promoting humanity. Consequently, posting their social activities across various cyberspace platforms does not bestow human dignity. This is because people with a low self esteem and self-worth affected by terrorism and also exposed to cyber bullying are adversely affected. More so, their human dignity is vulnerable to cyber abuse from other terrorists striving to reduce the level of human dignity, worth, confidence, and esteem among human beings desiring to be loved, respected, appreciated, and honored (Sabella, Justin & Sameer, 2013).
Human Dignity and Cyber Spaces
It is evident social attitudes develop into norms influencing how human beings tackle the different circumstances impacting human dignity. As a result, cyberspaces have been influencing human dignity among users. Although cyberspaces were developed to assist human beings lead more comfortable lives, they have led to development of social attitudes, norms, and circumstances promoting cyber bullying incidences removing human dignity. Thus, cyber criminals and bullies adversely affect individuals’ attitudes through social norms enhancing into circumstances removing human dignity. They also influence human perspectives regarding cultural and religious principles, social values, and ethics sustaining human dignity. Human beings with a low self-esteem, value, and worth are therefore prone to cyber bullying circumstances removing human dignity (Mette, 2002).
There various forms of cyberspaces such as Facebook and Twitter should utilize freedom of speech and diversity to ensure the worth, value, and esteem among human species is bestowed. They should promote human integration and associations without providing cybercriminals with an opportunity to remove human dignity. As a result, cybercriminals employing harmful computer viruses and malware in order to remove human dignity should be punished. For example, cybercriminals targeting innocent victims to engage in cybercrime such as identity theft and money laundering should be identified and punished in order to bestow targets’ human dignity (Cook, Waugh, Abdipanah, Hashemi & Abdul, 2014).
Assessment and Consequences of Human Dignity versus Cyberspaces
The main perspective that can promote human dignity is allied to the fact that, human species were created in the image of God. Thus, people should be valued, respected, honored, and dignified. Natural factors favoring people to survive in their own species in order to acquire a special worth and intrinsic value over other species should also be enhanced. For example, people should not use freedom of speech to tarnish other peoples’ reputations especially through cyberspaces (Li, 2007). More so, mass media reports should avoid using cyberspaces and other platforms neither bestowing nor enhancing human dignity. Instead, they should utilize the platform awarded through freedom of speech and spread of cyberspaces to ensure human species respect and value each other (Bryce & James, 2013).
Consequently, cyberspaces should not be utilized by malicious, unethical and immoral people to remove human dignity from other human species. They should utilize the cyberspaces to engage in social activities developing into norms ensuring circumstances bestowing human dignity are identified. For example, cyberspace users relying on Facebook and Twitter should use the social networking sites to encourage other human beings discouraged and feeling worthless due to a low self-esteem (Cook, Waugh, Abdipanah, Hashemi & Abdul, 2014). They should also use them to advocate for religious and cultural beliefs bestowing human dignity. This involves providing employment opportunities to human beings with a low self-esteem and worth for lack of employment. Consequently, human beings can utilize cyberspaces to bestow the different types of human dignity (Clark, 2010).
David Kirchhoffers’ arguments that human beings should be social species utilizing available resources and opportunities to deepen the understanding of human dignity should be emulated. All members of the human species born with the sense of humanity should therefore practice to ensure the possessive ability to bestow human dignity is enhanced. More importantly, they should rely on social attitudes and norms that do not encourage them to lose the sense of self-worth. This is because they can also encourage other human beings to rely on moral, ethical, and religious practices bestowing human dignity. Through this, thieves and terrorists and people removing human dignity among innocent victims can be encouraged to practice bestowing human dignity (Han, Janmaat, Hoskins & Green, 2010).
Conclusion
Human beings seek justice, acceptance, appreciation and love from their colleagues. Thus, social attitudes and norms play a key role in determining levels of human dignity among human beings. Consequently, circumstances created by technological growth and advancements influence human dignity through cyberspaces as human beings seek social justification to rationalize and validate their existence and presence (Lublin, 2012). This is detrimental to human dignity due to presence of cyber criminals and bullies keen in demoralizing, hurting, and destroying their victims’ self worth, esteem, value, honor, and confidence. Thus, immoral and unethical human beings engage in social activities and norms with intent to dehumanize innocent victims especially without self-worth and esteem (Dredge, John & Xochitl-de- la, 2014). Others utilize cyberspaces to either limit or expand social inequalities by spreading false rumors while committing financial and social crimes. Ultimately, utilizing cyberspaces to destroy levels of human dignity among innocent victims should be illegal. Thus, human beings should be keen and careful while utilizing cyberspaces in day-to-day lives in order to protect and sustain human dignity (Hanks, 2011).
References
Bryce, J., & James, F. (2013). It’s Common Sense That It’s Wrong’: Young People’s Perceptions and Experiences of Cyber Bullying. Cyber-Psychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(11), 783-87.
Catherine, K. (2011). ‘Unlike’ Cyber Bullying: Dignity in Schools Campaign. Retrieved on 12th May 2015 http://www.dignityinschools.org/blog/unlike-cyberbullying
Christopher, M. (2008). Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights. The European Journal of International Law.
Clark, D. (2010). Characterizing, Cyberspace: Past, Present, and, Future. Retrieved on 12th May 2015 https://projects.csail.mit.edu/ecir/wiki/images/7/77/Clark_Characterizing_cyberspace_1-2r.pdf
Cook, D., Waugh, B., Abdipanah, M., Hashemi, O., & Abdul, R. S. (2014). Twitter Deception and Influence: Issues of Identity, Slacktivism, and Puppetry. Journal of Information Warfare, 13(1), 58 – 71.
David, K. (2015). Dignity that Humans Always Already Have by Being a Member of the Human Species. Australian Catholic University.
Dredge, R., John, F. M., & Xochitl-de- la, P. G. (2014). Risk Factors Associated with Impact Severity of Cyber Bullying Victimization: A Qualitative Study of Adolescent Online Social Networking. Cyber-psychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(5), 287-91.
Green, A., Preston, J., & Janmaat, J. G. (2006). Education, Equality and Social Cohesion: A Comparative Analysis. Basinstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Han, C., Janmaat, J., Hoskins, B., & Green, A. (2010). Perceptions of Inequalities: Implications For Social Cohesion. Center for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies.
Hanks, J. C. (2011). Recent Developments in Education Law: Regulating Student Speech in Cyberspace. The Urban Lawyer, 43(3), 723-43.
Jonathan, B. (2014). Representation of Trolls in Mass Media Communication: A Review of Media-Texts and Moral Panics Relating to Internet Trolling. International Journal of Web-Based Communities, 10(1), 7-24.
Katherine, F. (2005). The Principle of Human Dignity: The 10 Second Summary. New York, Catechism of the Catholic Church.
King, A. V. (2010). Constitutionality of Cyber Bullying Laws: Keeping the Online Playground Safe for Both Teens and Free Speech. Vanderbilt Law Review, 63(3), 845-84.
Krishnamurti, J. (2014). Respect for Human Dignity. Retrieved on 12th May 2015 from: http://www.ncte-india.org/pub/unesco/ch14.htm
Li, Q. (2007). Bullying in the New Playground: Research into Cyber Bullying and Cyber Victimization. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(4), 435-54.
Lublin, N. (2012). Texting that Saves Lives. Filmed February 2012. TED 2012 Conference video, 5:24. Retrieved on 12th May 2015 from: http://www.ted.com/talks/nancy_lublin_texting_that_saves_lives
Marius, H. S. (2013). Free Expression, Cyber Bullying and Dignity in Schools. South Africa, North-West University.
Mette, L. (2002). What is Human Dignity? Maynooth, Faculty of Philosophy, National University of Ireland.
Mostafa, T. (2009). The Anatomy of Inequalities in Educational Achievements: An International Investigation of the Effects of Stratification. LLAKES Research Paper, London: Institute of Education.
Osberg, L., & Smeeding, T. (2006). ‘“Fair” Inequality? Attitudes towards Pay Differentials: The United States in Comparative Perspective. American Sociological Review.
Redmond, G., Viola, S., & Suhrcke, M. (2002). Attitudes to Inequality after Ten Years of Transition, Innocent. Working Paper No 88. UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.
Sabella, R. A., Justin, W. P., & Sameer, H. (2013). Cyber Bullying Myths and Realities. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 2703-11.
Tarrant, G. (2015). Cyber Safety: An Online Survival Guide for Parents. Pastoral Care and Personal Growth Team Organizational Report. Retrieved on 12th May 2015 http://www.dow.catholic.edu.au/Cybersafety/
Trope, Y., & Gaunt, R. (2007). Attribution and Person Perception. The Sage Handbook of Social Psychology: Concise Student Edition.