Jacob Weinrib (Queen's University) has posted Human Dignity and Its Critics (Gary Jacobsohn and Miguel Schor (eds) Comparative Constitutional Theory (Elgar Publishing, Forthcoming)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This Chapter explores four prominent objections to the overarching role that human dignity plays in constitutional and human rights law. In the eyes of its critics, human dignity is objectionable because it (1) is too variable to be captured by a coherent constitutional theory; (2) stands in opposition to a liberal vision of constitutional governance; (3) fails to offer guidance for resolving constitutional disputes; and (4) is incapable of justifying anything until it is itself justified. My aim is to unearth the presuppositions that generate these objections, explain why these presuppositions are controversial, and to formulate a set of plausible alternatives that do not give rise to these objections. Since the leading objections stem from presuppositions that need not be accepted, these objections do not preclude the formulation of a comparative constitutional theory of human dignity.
And from the paper:
This sequential strategy departs from each of the approaches for proceeding from principle to application considered in this section. Unlike the utilitarian approach, which generates practical guidance by applying a moral principle directly to a factual matrix, the sequential strategy concretizes the demands of human dignity through an ordered series of normative and doctrinal stages. Further, unlike Dupré, who identifies what dignity demands with the judgments that courts happen to have handed down, an approach that explains why these doctrines are required and what they require when appropriately formulated would offer a critical standpoint for assessing actual judgments. Suitably elaborated, the sequential strategy would offer a standpoint for identifying judgments that either invoke the term dignity while abandoning the concept or that employ the concept in the absence of the term. Finally, unlike Waldron who conceives of broad terms like dignity as open to argumentation from all corners, the sequential strategy would delineate the kind of argumentation relevant to the adjudication of dignity claims. Because the doctrines identify the relevant considerations for adjudicating a dignity claim, argumentation occurs within parameters specified by law. A commitment to human dignity need not imperil the predictability for which the rule of law strives.
Highly recommended.