Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Open Political Science

Editor-in-Chief: de Mucci, Raffaele

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2543-8042
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Immigration, Humanity, and Morality

Sunday Adeniyi Fasoro
Published Online: 2019-08-16 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/openps-2019-0004

Abstract

The trend toward the concept of humanity in political theory has arisen largely as a reaction against the mistreatment of vulnerable people such as immigrants. The issue of immigrants’ vulnerability has led political thinkers to ponder on how to apply the principle of humanity to the question of the treatment of immigrants. I would like to address this matter by examining two questions: what is humanity, is it a value property, or a virtue? Does it really matter if the means by which an immigrant immigrates is demeaning to his own humanity as a person? The most common or intuitive reply to these questions would probably be: ‘humanity’ is simply a value-bestowing property, so regardless of immigrants’ actions they are owed respectful treatment. The aim of this paper is to emphasise instead that ‘humanity’ should be conceived as a virtue of actual commitment to act on moral principles. I explore three different meanings of humanity. First, I discuss ‘humanity’ as the common ownership of the earth. Second, I discuss ‘humanity’ as a value property. Third, I discuss humanity as a virtue of acting, on the one hand, with humanity, and on the other hand, on moral principles.

Keywords: Immigrants’ Vulnerability; Humanity; Dignity; Good will; Respect; Morality

References

  • Abizadeh, Arash. “A Critique of the ‘Common Ownership of the Earth’ Thesis.” Les Ateliers de l’éthique/The Ethics Forum 8, no. 2 (2013): 33–40.Google Scholar

  • Abizadeh, Arash. “Liberal Egalitarian Arguments for Closed Borders: Some Preliminary Critical Reflections.” Éthique et Économique/Ethics and Economics 4, no. 1 (2006): 1–8.Google Scholar

  • Bader, Veit. Citizenship and Exclusion. London: Macmillan Press, 1997.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bader, Veit. “The Ethics of Immigration.” Constellations 12, no. 3 (2005): 331–61.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Bauder, Harald. “Open Borders: A Utopia?” Journal of Spacial Justice 5 (2012): 1–13.Google Scholar

  • Beck, Gunnar. “Immanuel Kant’s Theory of Rights.” Ratio Juris 19, no. 4 (2006): 371–401.Google Scholar

  • Beck, Ulrich, and Natan Sznaider. “Unpacking Cosmopolitanism for the Social Sciences: A Research Agenda.” British Journal of Sociology 57, no. 1 (2006): 1–23.Google Scholar

  • Benhabib, Seyla. Dignity in Adversity: Human Rights in Turbulent Times. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2011.Google Scholar

  • Benhabib, Seyla. “Reclaiming Universalism: Negotiating Republican Self-Determination and Cosmopolitan Norms.” The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 2004.Google Scholar

  • Benhabib, Seyla. The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents, and Citizens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.Google Scholar

  • Blake, Michael, and Mathias Risse. “Immigration and Original Ownership of the Earth.” Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy 23, no. 1 (2009): 133–65.Google Scholar

  • Bustamante, Jorge A. “Immigrants’ Vulnerability as Subjects of Human Rights.” The International Migration Review 36, no. 2 (2002): 333–54.Google Scholar

  • Cavallar, Georg. Kant’s Embedded Cosmopolitanism: History, Philosophy, and Education for World Citizens. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015.Google Scholar

  • Cole, Phillip. Philosophies of Exclusion: Liberal Political Theory and Immigration. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000.Google Scholar

  • Dean, Richard. “The Formula of Humanity as an End in Itself.” In Blackwell Guide to Kant’s Ethics, edited by Thomas E. Jr. Hill, 83–101. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2009.Google Scholar

  • Dean, Richard. The Value of Humanity in Kant’s Moral Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.Google Scholar

  • Fine, Robert. “Cosmopolitanism and Humanitarian Military Intervention: War, Peace and Human Rights This.” In Cosmopolitanism, 78–149, 2007.Google Scholar

  • Fine, Robert. “Kant’s Theory of Cosmopolitanism and Hegel’s Critique.” Philosophy & Social Criticism 29, no. 6 (November 1, 2003): 609–30.Google Scholar

  • Gregor, Mary. Laws of Freedom. New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 1963.Google Scholar

  • Gregor, Mary. “Natural Right or Natural Law?” Jahrbuch Für Recht Und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 3 (1995): 11–35.Google Scholar

  • Held, David. “Cosmopolitanism: Taming Globalization.” The Global Transformations Reader: An Introduction to the Globalization Debate, no. January 2003 (2003): 514–29.Google Scholar

  • Held, David. “Law of States, Law of Peoples: Three Models of Sovereignty.” Legal Theory 8, no. 2 (2002): 1–44.Google Scholar

  • Kant, Immanuel. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by Günter Zöller and Robert B. Louden. Translated by Mary Gregor, Paul Guyer, Günter Zöller, Robert B. Louden, Arnulf Zweig, Holly Wilson, and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

  • Kant, Immanuel. Critique of the Power of Judgment. Edited by Paul Guyer. Translated by Paul Guyer and Eric Matthews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar

  • Kant, Immanuel. Lectures on Natural Law Feyerabend. Translated by Lars Vinx. Unpublished, 2003.Google Scholar

  • Kant, Immanuel. The Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by Mary Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar

  • Kant, Immanuel, and Allen W. Wood. “Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim.” In Kant’s Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim: A Critical Guide, edited by Amélie Oksenberg Rorty and James Schmidt, 9–23. Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar

  • Kleingeld, Pauline. “Kant’s Changing Cosmopolitanism.” In Kant’s Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim: A Critical Guide, edited by Amélie Rorty and James Schmidt, 171–86. Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar

  • Kleingeld, Pauline. “Kant’s Cosmopolitan Law: World Citizenship for a Global Order.” Kantian Review 2 (1998): 72–90.Google Scholar

  • Kukathas, Chandran. “The Case for Open Immigration.” In Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics, edited by Andrew I. Cohen and Christopher Heath Wellman, 207–20. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005.Google Scholar

  • Kukathas, Chandran. “Why Open Borders?” Ethical Perspectives 19, no. 4 (2012): 649–75.Google Scholar

  • Miller, David. National Responsibility and Global Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

  • Miller, David. On Nationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.Google Scholar

  • Miller, David. Strangers in Our Midst: The Political Philosophy of Immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016.Google Scholar

  • O’Neill, Onora. “Cosmopolitanism Then and Now.” In Kant Und Die Philosophie in Weltbürgerlicher Absicht: Akten Des Xi. Kant-Kongresses 2010, edited by Margit Bacin, Stefano; Ferrarin, Alfredo; La Rocca, Claudio; Ruffing, 357–67. De Gruyter, 2013.Google Scholar

  • Oberman, Kieran. “Immigration and Equal Ownership of the Earth.” Ratio Juris 30, no. 2 (2016): 144–57.Google Scholar

  • Pécoud, Antoine, and Paul de Guchteneire. “International Migration, Border Controls and Human Rights: Assessing the Relevance of a Right to Mobility.” Journal of Borderlands Studies 21, no. 1 (2006): 69–86.Google Scholar

  • Pevnick, Ryan, Philip Cafaro, and Mathias Risse. “An Exchange: The Morality of Immigration.” Ethics and International Affairs 22, no. 3 (2008): 241–59.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Risse, Mathias. On Global Justice. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

  • Risse, Mathias. “On the Morality of Immigration.” Ethics and International Affairs 22, no. 1 (2008): 25–33.Google Scholar

  • Sangiovanni, Andrea. Humanity Without Dignity: Moral Equality, Respect, and Human Rights. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2017.Google Scholar

  • Sassen, Saskia. “Borders, Walls, and Crumbling Sovereignty.” Political Theory 40, no. 1 (2012): 116–22.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Sen, Amartya. The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009.Google Scholar

  • Stilz, Anna. “On Collective Ownership of the Earth.” Ethics & International Affairs 28, no. 4 (2014): 501–10.Google Scholar

  • Strawson, Peter F. “Freedom and Resentment.” In Proceedings of the British Academy, edited by Gary Watson, 48:1–25. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962.Google Scholar

  • Walla, Alice Pinheiro. “Common Possession of the Earth and Cosmopolitan Right.” Kant-Studien 107, no. 1 (2016): 160–78.Google Scholar

  • Walzer, Michael. Spheres of Justice: A Defence of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books, 1983.Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2019-03-04

Accepted: 2019-05-13

Published Online: 2019-08-16


Citation Information: Open Political Science, Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages 21–33, ISSN (Online) 2543-8042, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/openps-2019-0004.

Export Citation

© 2019 Sunday Adeniyi Fasoro, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License. BY 4.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in