From boni mores to personal autonomy Critical essay on the role of human dignity

After the French revolution, in front of a holist society hitherto, the willingness of a new individual to affirm his singularity did emerge. Whilst the Christian morality referred to God, the XVIIIth century philosophers, especially Kant, wanted to substitute a morality where, according to the words of Protagoras, man would be the measure of any things. The individual, however, still had to conform to what Kant names the categorical imperative, and to support for shared values. The morality became gradually felt as authoritative and illegitimate, the middle-class values. The 60's let rise an individual morality, which took the name of ethics. These upheavals were not without major effects on law of persons and family law. Boni mores disappeared therefore from family law to give way to human dignity in law of persons: to the conception of a model law that of a principle law did succeed. The concept of dignity was only tardily devoted in the Civil code: that could explain the absence of consensus concerning its definition. One can consider it regrettable that such a fragility could involve the dilution of this principle, and even its transformation into a subjective right; it does not oppose whereas a low resistance to the advent of personal autonomy, awkwardly built by the European Court of the human rights on the article 8 and the individual consent. The individual gained the right to operate choices on his body, however dangerous they are, and perhaps even freedom to give up the benefit of rights stated in the Convention. It thus appears essential to redefine dignity, a rampart against the reification of human being, around the concepts of freedom and equality. Consequently, from a harmful logic of competition between dignity and autonomy, a true relation of complementarity and hierarchy between these two concepts will be able to reappear.