Transcript The Human Responsibility Movement

Sue L. T. McGregor PhD Professor
Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax NS Canada
2010 International Cultural Research Network Conference Halifax NS
Finding a moral ground for a
globalized world
 Responsibilities complement
rights
 Responsibilities infringe on rights
 Responsibilities take precedence
over rights
 World is so different that new norms
are needed


Bills or declarations of responsible humans
have powerful support of luminary world
leaders (emeritus politicians, faith leaders,
scientists, artists, philosophers and Nobel
Laureates)
BUT – also strong opposition from Western
capitalistic nation states, some “developingcountry” states, lawyers, and some nongovernment organizations (especially
Amnesty International)




1993 The Carta of Human Duties (International
Council of Human Duties
1993 Declaration Toward a Global Ethic
(Council of the Parliament of the World’s
Religions)
1995 Our Global Neighbourhood (Commission
on Global Governance)
1997 Universal Declaration of Human
Responsibilities (The InterAction Council)




1998 The Universal Declaration of Global Ethic
(Temple University)
1998 The Charter of Human Responsibilities
(the Alliance for a Responsible, Plural and
United World)
1998 Universal Declaration of Human
Duties and Responsibilities (UNESCO
Valencia)
1999 A Common Framework for the Ethics of
the 21st Century (UNESCO)



2000 Universal Declaration of Human
Responsibilities (former Hart Center UK)
2000 Earth Charter (The Earth Charter
Initiative)
2003 Declaration on Human Social
Responsibilities (UN Human Rights
Commission (now the Human Rights
Council)

1993 Parliament of the World’s Churches

1997 InterAction Council

1998 UNESCO Valencia Initiative

2003 UN Human Rights Commission
COMMUNITARIAN VERSUS
FAITH-BASED
CONVERSE VERSUS
CORRELATIVE DUTIES
Western notions of
individualism (rights)
neglected responsibilities
 Failure to give duties equal
footing with rights caused
today’s problems
 Western notion of rights is
not the only right’s
perspective
 Need a global ethical
standard that reflects
principles entrenched in
world’s religions


Responsibilities owed by
individuals to society
 Vertical duties that run
upwards towards society
 Responsibility of
individual to respect the
rights of other individuals
 Horizontal duties that run
between (across) actors
‘AN ETHIC’ VERSUS ETHICS
A global ethic represents
shared ethical values,
attitudes and criteria to which
all nations and interest
groups commit themselves –
a universal ethical manifesto
 Ethics refers to uniform
ethical system (codes of
ethics of which some are
legally enforceable, norms)

ETHICAL VERSUS LEGAL
RESPONSIBILITIES
Ethical responsibilities are
personally felt by a person
who is internally motivated to
accept the duty out of a sense
of conscience, love and the
dignity of humanity (duty
towards others and the
community)
 Legal responsibilities are
duties that are imposed by
an external body or
authority

Transcultural undertandings and interpretations of
core concepts – the conundrum created when people
of different languages and cultures try to agree on
how to define and translate:
 Duty
 Obligation
 Responsibility
NOTE – Küng (2005) observed most initiatives tend to
use responsibility because it emphasizes inner
responsibility (‘an ethic’) rather than external law
(ethics); the term responsibility exerts a moral pressure
but does not legally compel

Duties to
Society
Responsibility

1993 - Council of the Parliament of the
World’s Religions (CPWR) Hans Küng

1997 - InterAction Council Hans Küng

1998 - UNESCO/Valencia Richard
Goldstone

2003 - UNHRC Miguel Algonso Martinez


CPWR contains four
irrevocable directives
(commitments or
affirmations – ancient
guidelines or ethical
principles of humanity
that underpin all
religions)
IAC contains 19 articles
organized into six main
topics/themes

Valencia declaration
contains 41 articles
organized into 12
chapters (akin to major
rights housed in UNDHR)

UNHRC contains 29
articles, with 17 of them
pertaining to “every
person” (no themes or
chapters)






31 duties in total across four initiatives
Common Duties/Themes (7 appeared in all four
(22%), 13 appeared in three (42%), 5 appeared in
two declarations (16%) and 6 appeared once (19%)
65% (n=20)appeared three times or more –
evidence of fairly strong correlation
35% (n=11) appeared twice or less, and mostly in
the communitarian approach
Relatively unique sets of duties in each initiative,
with overlap
Different duties for faith-based versus
communitarian



Titles included the concepts of universal and
global (to ensure the future of humanity and
the planet)
Universal means worldwide in scope, global
means involving the whole earth – both terms
refer to not being limited to local concerns
Meet basic human needs and security of
humankind through reciprocal
responsibilities





Three aspire for eventual adoption by the
United Nations
Two of these are receiving a lot of pushback
(UNHRC and InterAction Council)
The third, the Valencia one, is under the radar
The one on global ethics has not had any
pushback and was not intended for the UN
Pushback – duties will morph into legal
responsibilities that will weaken rights


Whether it is faith-based or communitarian
does not seem to matter (one of each is
getting push back – respectively, InterAction
Council and the UNHRC
Main focus is to strive to reconcile
ideologies, beliefs, political views and cultural
differences for the good of humanity and the
earth – become grounded in ethical
principals, values and aspirations as fellow
humans