THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE

Abstract

The concept of human dignity is familiar to us, yet we can hardly define it. We know intuitively what it refers to, but this apprehension is always dependent on a cultural and social context. Our own view of what is dignified to be or to do may differ  from other people’s views. This leads sometimes to a conflict of values that is not easily resolved. But should it be resolved? Isaiah Berlin held the firm belief that value pluralism is essential for the good life in a free society and that freedom can  only manifest itself in our capacity of choice. Therefore, genuine values can clash and it is the objective of each functional democracy to balance them in order to avoid chaos. Choice means inevitably putting a value above others, at least for a  certain period of time. Sometimes it is dignity, other times it could be life, security, or health. And these are all personal choices. Yet, the problem arises when personal choice is indistinguishable from the choices imposed by or onto a group of people, either  in a society or in a state. It will be this paper’s task to show that a society which imposes its own definition of dignity is trampling upon the very own human dignity it implies.