Western thought has developed an anthropology which focuses on human dignity as the core of human existence. A pivotal role played the famous Oratio de hominis dignitate from Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1486/2008), which brought human dignity to the fore in writings on the human being.
I call this classic Western anthropology the homo dignus, the dignified human being. Both its theological (e.g. Pascal, 1669/1834) and philosophical interpretations (e.g. Kant, 1785/1906) share important characteristics: they all connect human dignity to human rationality and morality. Moreover, they view dignity as a universal, given and active characteristic. Nevertheless, the faltering belief in an unchangeable cosmic order led to disagreements on the precise importance and origin of dignity. But the idea still persists that all human beings have dignity which entails a moral calling.
This view on human dignity is able to enrich the anthropology of economics. In the past decades, economic anthropology has already widened to include insights from institutional economics. Contrary to the amorphous anthropology of standard economics, institutional economics point to the circumstances or institutions which govern human life and decisions. On one hand, there are the delimiting natural circumstances, exhibited by resource and energy scarcity and climate change in recent years. On the other hand, there are the cultural circumstances, the human-created traditions, customs and forms which govern a large part of life. These institutions are central to a well-informed economic anthropology.
The anthropology of the homo dignus finds further inspiration in the field of behavioural economics (e.g., Kahneman, 2011). Whereas neoclassical economics adheres to the view of human beings as the homo economicus¸ the perfectly rational, behavioural economics provided convincing proofs of the bounds on rationality. Heuristics and well-informed guesses usually triumph over extensive calculation, forming the core of bounded rationality.
Another important aspect brought about by the homo dignus concerns human morality. Economics has long sought to portray itself as an exact, positive and value-free science. Economic decisions should thus be analyzed only by the homo economicus on their efficiency and effectiveness. However, theology informs us that the human being is a moral one. Acting and choosing inevitably entails moral choices and considerations. Separating economic choice-making from moral thought is a dangerous course, opening the door to the unheeded immoral consequences of the most efficient solution.
This fear is strengthened by the behavioural insight that morality is bounded, too. Theology has always measured human moral behaviour to objective standards and found it lacking. Behavioural psychology has found that human beings also fall short of their own, subjective standards. Not only is it unwise to disregard morality, we also open the door to moral failure and sin.
What does the idea of human dignity, the homo dignus, mean in the context of these forces, which seem to limit human freedom of choice and tarnish the human standing? It should be an ever-stronger calling for behaviour and decisions according to dignity. If economics is to understand the human being and guide us to good decisions, a strong sense of human dignity and the limits of human nature are indispensable to its anthropology.
Key bibliographic sources
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.
Kant, I. (1906). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. Hamburg: Felix Meiner. (original: 1785).
Pascal, B. (1834). Pensées. Paris: Lefèvre. (original: 1669).
Pico della Mirandola, G. (2008). Rede over de menselijke waardigheid (Op de Coul, M., trans.). Groningen: Historische Uitgeverij. (original: Oratio de hominis dignitate; 1486).