This book deals with the thorny issue of human rights in different cultures and religions, especially in the light of bioethical issues. In this book, experts from Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Daoism, Hinduism and Confucianism discuss the tension between their religious traditions and the claim of universality of human rights. The East-West contrast is particularly evident with regards to human rights. Some writers find the human rights language too individualistic and it is foreign to major religions where the self does (...) not exist in isolation, but is normally immersed in a web of relations and duties towards family, friends, religion community, and society. Is the human rights discourse a predominantly Western liberal ideal, which in bioethics is translated to mean autonomy and free choice? In today's democratic societies, laws have been drafted to protect individuals and communities against slavery, discrimination, torture or genocide. Yet, it appears unclear at what moment universal rights supersede respect for cultural diversity and pluralism. This collection of articles demonstrates a rich spectrum of positions among different religions, as they confront the ever more pressing issues of bioethics and human rights in the modern world. This book is intended for those interested in the contemporary debates on religious ethics, human rights, bioethics, cultural diversity and multiculturalism. (shrink)

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. 唐文明教授探討黑格爾的現代承認理論，再「通過重構奥古斯丁關於人從記憶中尋求上帝的描述，提出一種基於創造論的承認理論」；最後通過分析儒教經典指出天人之倫乃是人倫的基礎，這與基督教思想吻合，這種耶儒比較也 開出「宗教性的生命倫理學」。唐教授的文章內容豐富，所探討的問題也非常重要，如他所言，現代社會普遍面對「物化」的問題——對他人、對自然和對自我的物化，問題根源是「自我與他人之間的相互承認」出現偏差。相反 ，正確的相互承認能為人的尊嚴和平等，以及現代社會的倫理實踐提供基礎。唐教授為耶儒的匯通作出重大貢獻，也激發我們反思世俗主義能否為人倫提供基礎。 In his article, Professor Tang critically evaluates Hegel's modern theory of recognition and proposes a kind of recognition theory based on protology. He proposes that human relations should be founded on our relationship with Heaven through exploring the Confucian classics and that this is consistent with Christian thought. This kind of thought leads to a kind of religion-based life ethics. I believe that Professor Tang makes important contributions to (...) the dialogue between Christianity and Confucianism by showing the convergence of both worldviews. In my article, I give provide additional support for this kind of convergence while at the same time pointing out some areas of divergence. For example, I note that, as both Christianity and Confucianism are challenged by secularism in contemporary societies, their dialogue should be expanded to include Christianity, Confucianism, and secularist traditions (such as naturalism). I believe Christianity and Confucianism align on one weakness of naturalism: the difficulty of justifying objective moral standards through the epistemology of positivism or scientism. Within both Christianity and Confucianism, it is possible to justify objective moral standards and to provide spiritual resources for overcoming the dehumanization of humans in modern society. A kind of religion-based life ethics is therefore greatly relevant in our context. (shrink)