Mama Amon
JF-Expert Member
- Mar 30, 2018
- 2,022
- 2,481
I. Usuli
Waraka wa Vatican uitwao "Dignitas Infinita" kwa KIlatini, yaani "infinite dignity," kwa Kiingereza, na "Heshima isiyo na mipaka," kwa Kiswahili, umesambazwa tarehe 08 Aprili 2024.. Ujumbe mkuu wa waraka huu unaweza kuwasilishwa kwa asilimia kubwa na hoja ya kifalsafa ifuatayo:
"For three millennia of Christianity, all Popes, all Bishops, all Priests, all nuns, and all lay persons have been under a duty to be at the service of all human persons because of heir their inherent ontological dignity which bestows fundamental and unique status on them in the world, in such a way that, the possibility of losing this dignity is ruled out in all spatio-temporal circumstances." (My synthesis of Para 1)
"Human ontological dignity is grounded by the fact that, each and every human person is an organism which is constituted as a center of individual, sovereign, and substantial radical capacity for conscious, emotional, free, rational and intentional bodily behaviors , which are natural signs of social, economic, political, educational, curative, ecological, artistic, scientific, technological, sexual , ethical, and religious actions, where these actions variously point toward diverse human goods which fulfill human persons by grounding their rights and duties." (My synthesis of Para 2-33)
Thus, all clerics and lay persons are under a duty for "unconditional respect for human dignity" which requires them to avoid "Grave Violations of Human Dignity," which include offenses against biological life, such as murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia, and willful suicide; violations of the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental torture, undue psychological pressures; offenses against human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children, degrading working conditions where individuals are treated as mere tools for profit rather than free and responsible persons; death penalty which similarly violates the inalienable dignity of every person, regardless of the circumstances; The Drama of Poverty; War, terrorist attacks, racial or religious persecution; homelessness of Migrants; Human Trafficking; Sexual Abuse; Violence Against Women; Abortion; Surrogacy; Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide; Marginalization of People with Disabilities; and violence by which some are "imprisoned, tortured, and even deprived of the good of life solely because of their sexual orientation"; promoting "a society without sexual differences" including Sex Change; and "Digital Violence." (My synthesis of para 34-66)
Waraka unafafanua chimbuko la fundisho hili kama ifuatavyo:
“The Church’s Magisterium progressively developed an ever-greater understanding of the meaning of human dignity… until it arrived at the recognition that the dignity of every human being prevails beyond all circumstances” (Dignitas Infinita, para 16).
Baada ya mchujo wa kifikra unaotofautisha hoja ya kifaksafa na hoja ya kiteolojia zilizo katika makala unaojadiliwa hapa, katika makala hii nataka kufupisha, kufafanua, na kutetea fasili ya ubinadamu iliyotajwa hapo juu, ambayo hasa ndio hoja ya kifalsafa iliyomo katika waraka wa Vatican.
Yaani, nitakuwa najadili hoja ya kianthropolojia, au tuseme "philosophical anthropology." Kwa ajili ya kuondoa utata kuhusu neno "anthropology," napenda niseme hivi:
By the word “anthropology,” throughout this essay, I shall mean “philosophical anthropology.” This is a branch of philosophy familiar in many universities, which deals with all aspects of human being in a comprehensive manner. Nowadays it is enriched by scientific anthropology, and so we can speak of philosophic-scientific anthropology.
However, it does not refer to social anthropology, the comparative study of human cultures and their development, which is the subject matter of anthropology departments in some Universities.
However, it does not refer to social anthropology, the comparative study of human cultures and their development, which is the subject matter of anthropology departments in some Universities.
II. Utangulizi
Baada ya miaka mingi ya utafiti, hatimaye tarehe 8 Aprili 2024, Papa Francis aliidhinisha kuchapishwa na kusambazwa kwa Waraka wa Vatican uitwao "Dignitas Infinita" kwa KIlatini, yaani "infinite dignity," kwa Kiingereza, na "Heshima isiyo na mipaka," kwa Kiswahili.
Waraka huu unatamka kwamba kuna "heshima ya bindamu" Isiyo fungwa na mipaka ya kinasibu kama vile dini, rangi, kabila, ukanda, jinsi, jinsia, na uelekeo wa nguvu za kijinsia.
Hivyo, waraka huu unatoa jawabu la kifalsafa na kiteolojia kuhusu swali lifuatalo: "What are the determinants of the uniqueness of human persons as opposed to non-humans and what is its implications to public policy formulation?"
Yaani, "Chimbuko la heshima pekee ya binadamu, kama wakitofautishwa na vitu visivyo binadamu, ni kitu gani na heshima hiyo inamaanisha nini katika utengenezaji wa sera za serikali ya watu?
Katika uchambuzi huu nitafanya mchujo unaoniwezesha kuongelea hoja za kifalsafa pekee zilizomo kwenye waraka huu.
Kimsingi, huu ni waraka ambao unajaribu kufafanua "itikadi thabiti ya ubinadamu inayoweza kuweka msingi imara wa sera zinazostawisha maslahi ya watu wote," kwa kuzingatia mchujo wa kifalsafa na kiteolojia, lakini katika mipaka ya Mafundisho ya Kanisa Katoliki kuhusu binadamu na jamii inayomzunguka.
Katika waraka huu, maneno yanayoeleza kiini cha ujumbe wa Papa ni "the foundations of traditional Christian anthropology," (ibara ya 13). Yaani "misingi ya ubinadamu kutokana na mapokeo ya Kikristo."
Neno "anthropology" linamaanisha somo linalochunguza muundo na hulka ya wanadamu.
III. Muhtasari wa Waraka
Kwa ufupi, Waraka wa "Dignitas Infinita," bila kujumlisha maneno yaliyo kwenye "footnotes" zake, unayo maneno 11,804 yaliyounda aya 63, zinazojaza kurasa 20, kwa kutumia herufi za "Times New Roman," mcharazo wa pointi 12, "single spacing," kwa kutumia programu ya Microsoft Word.
Aya hizi 63 zimegawanyika kwenye sehemu tano, zinazojadili ubinadamu kwa kutumia hoja za kifalsafa na kiteolojia. Hoja ya kifalsafa, inaweza kufupishwa katika maneno 1,000, yafuatayo:
“human person,” “human rights,” “physical and mental integrity,” “the right to … life,” “right of participation,” “unjust and unlawful coercion,” “physical or mental torture,” “economy,” “total fulfillment in dignity,” “capital,” “social relationships,” “ fraternity,” “human beings,” “material objects,” “human nature,” “freedom,” “conscience,” “individual," "substance,” “rational nature,” “knowing and understanding,” “wanting, loving, choosing, and desiring,” “corporeal functions,” “the body and soul which constitute the human being,” “free and responsible decision,” “sexual orientation,” “ one’s own body and that of others,” “ ineliminable sexual differences between man and woman, " “the soul and the body.”
Mchujo makini wa kiakili unaonyesha kwamba, katika maneno haya ya waraka, kuna sifa 16 za ubinadamu, nazo ni:
- Substantiality : uwepo wa utambuliko wa kudumi bila kujali mabadiliko ya kimwili yanayotokea siku hadi siku, mahali hadi mahali
- individuality: hali ya kuwa kitu kimoja kinachohesabika,
- corporeality: bodiliness, embodiment , yaani mwili wenye uzito, ujazo na viungo 78 kila kimoja kikiwa na kazi yake,
- spirituality: rationality, affectivity, volitionality, intentionality. affectivity, feelings, conscience, consciousness, memory , yaano roho, kumbukumbu ya mambo yaliyopita,
- subjective sovereignty: hali ya kuwa nafsi ambayo ni kitovu chenye ukuu wa ndani usiojulikana kwa mtu baki yeyote aliye nje ya nafsi hiyo.
- sociality: participation, yaani uanajamii,
- economicality: yaani uanauchumi,
- politicality: uanasiasa,
- sexuality : ujinsi na ujinsia.
- ecologicality : yaani hali ya kuwa fundo mojawapo katika wavu wa kiikolojia.
- Scientificality: Uanasayansi
- Technologicality: Uanatekinolojia
Mchoro ufuatao unaonyesha vizuri uhusiano uliopo kati ya sifa hizi za ubinadamu:
Source: Juan Manuel Burgos(2022), Personalist Anthropology: A Philosophical Guide to Life (Delaware, USA: Vernon Press), p.155. The Book is attached below.
Kwa kutumia dnana hizi kama msingi wake, Papa Francis anapinga umaskini, vita, utelekezwaji wa wakimbizi, biashara ya kuuza binadamu, ukatili wa kijinsia, ukatili dhidi ya wanawake, utoaji mimba, upandikizaji wa mimba kwenye tumbo la kukodi, mauaji ya mgonjwa kama njia ya kumpunguzia mateso lakini bila ridhaa yake, mauaji ya mgonjwa kama njia ya kumpunguzia mateso baada ya kupata ridhaa yake, utelekezaji wa watu wenye ulemavu, ubaguzi kwa kuzingatia maelekeo ya kijinsia, kubadilisha jinsia, na ukatilini wa mitandaoni.
IV. Ufafanuzi wangu wa ujumbe uliomo katika waraka
Kutokana na uelewa wangu huu kuhusu waraka wa Vatican, napendekeza kunyumbulisha na kufupisha sifa za ubinadamu, na maana yake katika ulimwengu wa kisiasa, kiuchumi na kijamii, kama ifuatavyo:
“We Christians are neither collectivists nor individualists, but personalists. These are names of three different ideologies, where communitarian personalism is the superior option.
"Regardless of the attending contingent circumstances, each and every human person is an organism which is constituted as a center of individual, sovereign, and substantial radical capacity for conscious, emotional, free, rational and intentional bodily behaviors , which are natural signs of social, economic, political, educational, curative, ecological, artistic, scientific, technological, sexual , ethical, and religious actions, where these actions variously point toward diverse human goods which fulfill human persons by grounding their rights and duties."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that the human person, however conceived, has a fundamental, inherent dignity, and that the human person is an embodied individual substance having a rational nature."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that we have 'ontological dignity,' a belief which emphasizes the fact that there is a kind of dignity that is inseparable from our very being, rather than deriving from the acts we happen to perform, or the social status we happen to have, or the conditions in which we might find ourselves. Those other kinds of dignity can be gained or lost, but ontological dignity cannot be. On this view, the conclusion that certain things are ruled out by human dignity 'beyond every circumstance,' 'in all circumstances,' and 'regardless of the circumstances,' is very crucial.
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that , the embodiment of the human person entails the fact that, each and every human person has a body which is a separate and determinate portion of matter which has weight, volume, and is contained by space.
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, because of the embodiment of the human person, the human body, like any other body, has the following attributes, among others: figure, divisibility, dilatability, mobility, inertia, extension, impenetrability and irreplicability.
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, because impenetrability is the property of material bodies in consequence of which a body excludes every other body from the part of space it itself occupies, then, the human body has this property too, from which fact it follows that, no two human persons can occupy the same space at the same time, and that no human person can occupy two disjoint spaces at the same time.
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, since irreplicability is the property of all material bodies in consequence of which a body cannot be multilocated, that is, it cannot exactly be located at more than one region, at the same time, the human body cannot be multi-located, meaning that, necessarily, no human body has more than one exact location simultaneously.
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that substantiality of the human person entails the fact that, the human person subsists through accidental changes, and hence has a coherent identity across time and space, meaning that, each human person is a distinct and different entity."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that the rationality of the human person entails the fact that, within the wide world of substances, persons are a specific class, in that, they are substances which have intelligence, and thus are capable of understanding the world of reality around their minds, as opposed to possible illusory experiences."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, in addition to the fact that, a human person is an individual entity like an atom, a grain of wheat, a fly and an elephant, still the human person is an individual entitywho directs himself with intelligence and with free will."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, although a human being is a person who exists in a physical way, he also super-exists spiritually in knowledge and in love, in such a way that, in some sense, he is a universe in himself, because of the mind which has variously been used to refer to intelligence, free will, the soul and conscious life manifested by humans."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, a human being is a micro-cosmos in which the whole, great universe can be comprehended with knowledge, and e can give himself entirely as a gift to beings which are before him as other human selves, a relationship of which it is impossible to find an equivalent in the physical world."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that the human person is a being worthy in himself but needs to cooperate with others to achieve his perfection."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that the the human person is dynamic and active, capable of transforming the natural world and reaching the ultimate human fulfillment."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that the human person is spiritual and bodily, possessing a freedom that allows him to determine himself and deciding in part not only his future but his way of being, is rooted in the world of affectivity and is a bearer of and is destined for a transcendent end."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that the human person possesses these characteristics because, in the end, the human being, this flesh and these bones, both perishable, exists from the uterus to the tomb by work of the very existence of his soul which dominates time and death, meaning that, the spirit is the root of the personality."
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that human consciousness will lead to great things in the moral, social, political, economic, sexual, cultural and religious dimensions of humanity.”
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that the human person, a creature of body and soul, is greater than the State, of which as an individual he is a part.
“We Christians are personalists because we oppose the vesting of all authority in the hands of the state house instead of vesting it in the parliamentarians who are the hands of the sovereign people.”
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe in the individuality of each self having consciousness, feelings, intelligence and a free will that facilitates free human activities], and not in the economic determinism of the Community philosophy.”
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, while the libido capacity, which means sex drive or the desire for sex, varies in kind from one person to the next, all human persons a have a sexual nature, which is manifested by the anthropological fact that, some are androphilic, others are gynophilic, and some are neutrophilic, where, androphilic women are naturally attracted by gynophilic men and vice versa, this attraction being consequent upon their complementary sexual orientations,
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, because of their complementary sexual orientations, human persons are forced to communicate and finally commune together as coital societies which allow the copulating pairs to experience the good of body-self integration, which is a consequence of a successful sexual response cycle, which has four phases, namely, excitement, plateau, orgasm, and resolution.
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, regular sex encounters within coital societies are naturally antecedent to parental societies, each parental society being a stable family of husband-father, wife-mother and their biological children, this being a basic cell of a nation responsible for elementary socialization of the young generation.”
“We Christians are Personalists because we believe that, in addition to the fact that human persons having heterosexual sexual orientations are in the majority, there is a minority of human persons who have non-heterosexual sexual orientations, who belong to the category of people with disabilities (PWD's) since they are persons with sexual disabilities, and this happens by reason of the disorders of sexual orientation development, and they are not blameworthy because of their anomalous sexual orientations.
"We Christians are not individualists because they assert and we deny the claim that the individual qua individual is simultaneously the most fundamental unit of society and the largest possible moral unit."
"We Christians are not individualists because we assert and they deny the claim that the family – this first, small community – that is the fundamental unit of society, and as such affords it as high a moral standing as the individual."
"We Christians are not individualists because we assert and they deny the claim that we are social animals. Every individual is dependent on something and someone else – the family – just to get off the ground. That means that family is more fundamental than the individual."
"We Christians are not individualists because we assert and they deny the claim that if the individual, in their moral worth and capacity, is totally dependent on the family, then the individual cannot be the largest possible moral unit. Given these flaws, individualism reduces persons to less than what they are. Individualism cannot uphold the dignity of the individual it claims to believe in."
"We Christians are not individualists because they assert and we deny the claim that society is an aggregation of individuals, of their actions and choices, and the individual’s free, unencumbered choice, so long as it doesn’t unduly constrain another’s free choice, is the bestower of moral legitimacy. This means that family, community, religion, tradition, society, etc. are secondary to the individual and have little to no claim to restraint of the individual’s choices."
"However, we personalists and the individualists share a belief in the inherent dignity of the individual and the individual rights that flow from that. We both believe that real persons are unique – different from one another. They have different wants and needs. There is a real beauty in their variety and a lack of uniformity. All of this is papered over when we limit our gaze to 'the people' as a pure abstraction."
"We Christians are not collectivists because they assert and we deny the claim that the collective – however defined and however large – is the primary moral unit. There is nothing more fundamental or important than the group itself and its good.This means that the group has ultimate say over the individual, and its needs are held to a higher importance than the needs of any one individual. The Marxist dictum, 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his need,' does an excellent job of summing up the collectivist ethos."
"We Christians are not collectivists because , despite rosy collectivist rhetoric, they do not leave much room for an individual to be fully themselves. In extreme circumstances, as in the massacres and mass imprisonment in harsh environments seen in several communist regimes, the individual is so reduced to a cog – so reduced to a group-utility maximizer – that, if they are deemed to be an obstacle by those acting on the behalf of the collective, they are simply removed."
"However, we personalists and the collectivists are united by a belief in the necessity and moral uprightness of social solidarity, in the reality of human dependence on others and in the praiseworthiness of those who sacrifice their needs for the greater good."
“As personalists we must work for personalism revolution that opposes both the extreme individualism of the capitalism, and the extreme collectivism of communism. We must work for the Personalist revolution because we believe in the dignity of man and the derivative rights and duties.”
"As personalists, we are called upon to oppose all policies that denigrate ontological human dignity , through the instrumentality of lunatic and exaggerated glorification of unwarranted dichotomies, such as heterosexuality-versus-nonheterosexuality, clerics-versus-laity , master-versus-slave , ability-versus-disability , manhood-versus-womanhood , rhetorical argumentation-versus-technical argumentation , orthodoxy doctrine-versus-heterodox doctrine , scientism-versus-theologism.
"As personalists we must always insist that, ontological human dignity is a universal attribute which transcends the barriers across these dichotomies, and hence a source of human unity as opposed to human diversity."
V. Somo tunalojifunza kutokana na waraka
Kazi ya kutafuta jawabu kwa swali, "What are the determinants of the uniqueness of human persons as opposed to non-humans and what is its implications to public policy formulation?" sio ya Papa Francis pekee, ambaye kimsingi ni mwanateolojia. Hii pia ni kazi ya wanafasafa, wanasayansi na wanasiasa. Kila mmoja anao mchango wake ambao hauna mbadala. Ni kazi ya kila mjasiriadola pia. Nitaeleza.
Katika nchi ambayo ni jamhuri ya kidemokrasia, yenye kuongozwa na kanuni ya ujamaa na kujitegemea (principle of subsidiarity), kama ilivyo Tanzania, "ujamaa pekee" haufai na "ubepari pekee" ni mwiko.
Badala yake kuna njia ya kati inayoitwa "ujamaa na kujitegemea" yenye kubeba mazuri ya ujamaa na kujitegemea, na kuyakataa mabaya ya mifumo hii miwili. Heshima ya ubinadamu inayoongelewa kwenye waraka inatuelekeza kwenye njia hii ya tatu.
Hivyo, serikali yetu inapaswa kutokana na watu, na kisha kufanya kazi kwa niaba ya watu hao na kwa faida ya watu hao kwa kupalilia maslahi ya pamoja katika Taifa zima.
Kimsingi, serikali iliyotokana na watu, yenye kufanya kazi kwa niaba ya watu na kwa faida ya watu hao, hupambana usiku na mchana kujenga taifa moja kwa kufanya mambo makuu sita:
- Kuanzisha na kueneza "itikadi ya ubinadamu" ikifafanua kinaganaga hulka ya wanadamu ili kujenga "imani ya jamii" ambayo ni msingi imara wa sera zinazoweza kustawisha maslahi ya watu wote katika Taifa;
- Kuimarisha "afya" za wananchi ili kuwa na Taifa lenye siha bora kupitia programu za kukinga na kutibu magonjwa katika ngazi mbalimbali za mfumo wa hospitali nchini;
- Kusambaza "elimu" inayozalisha wataalamu katika fani zote za sanaa, sayansi na tekinolojia, kuanzia chekechea hadi kidato cha nne, kutoka kidato cha nne hadi vyuo vya ufundi, kutoka kidato cha tano hadi sita, na kutoka kidato cha sita hadi chuo kikuu, ili hatimaye tuweze kujenda mtaji thabiti wa rasilimali watu yenye kutosheleza mahitaji ya nguvukazi ya Taifa;
- Kulinda na kuendeleza "ikolojia" iliyo rafiki kwa watu kwa kudhibiti na kuzuia mabadiliko ya tabianchi yaliyo hatari kwa maisha ya watu.
- Kujenga "ofisi za utawala" zenye hadhi na kuwaingiza viongozi wenye weledi wa kuunda, kutekeleza, na kusimamia utekelezaji wa mikakati ya maendeleo, na wenye kuhesimu na kutimiza haki za raia wote kwa mujibu wa sheria bila ubaguzi holela kwa misingi ya dini, rangi, kabila, jinsi, jinsia, ukanda, uraia, urefu, ufupi, unene, au mvuto wa sura;
- Kuunganisha Taifa kwa kujenga miundombinu thabiti ya "kiuchumi na kijamii" inayounganisha mtu na mtu, kaya na kaya, kitongoji na kitongoji, mtaa na mtaa, kijiji na kijiji, kata na kata, tarafa na tarafa, wilaya na wilaya, mkoa na mkoa, watu na vituo vya huduma za kijamii, na hatimaye kuunganisha Taifa zima.
Je, Taifa la Tanzania, ambamo kuna serikali isiyo na dini, bunge lisilo na dini, mahakama isiyo na dini, na vyama vya siasa visivyo na dini, linayo "itikadi thabiti ya ubindamu" inayoweka msingi thabiti wa sera zinazoweza kustawisha maslahi ya watu wote" bila kubagua mtu yeyote kwa sababu za kinasibu?
Jawabu moja pekee linahusika kwa maswali yote, yaani jawabu la "hapana." Nitatoa mifano michache kuthibitisha msimamo wangu huu.
Moja, Ibara ya 12 ya Katiba ya Tanzania(1977) inasema kwamba "binadamu wote huzaliwa huru, na wote ni sawa" na kwamba "Kila mtu anastahili heshima ya kutambuliwa na kuthaminiwa utu wake," lakini hakuna ufafanuzi bayana wenye kuonyesha upekee wa "watu" dhidi ya "vitu"
Mbili, Ibara ya 4 ya Katiba ya CCM (1977) inasema kwamba "binadamu wote ni sawa," kwamba "kila mtu anastahikli heshima ya kutambuliwa na kuthaminiwa utu wake," na Nyongeza A inayotaja ahadi za wanachama wa CCM inasema kwamba "binadamu wote ni ndugu zangu," lakini hakuna ufafanuzi bayana wenye kuonyesha upekee wa "watu" dhidi ya "vitu"
Tatu, Ibara ya 4.1.1 katika Katiba ya Chadema (2006) inasema kwamba “madhumuni ya kisiasa” ni “kukuza, kulinda, kuelimisha na kutetea hali za binadamu katika misingi ya Tangazo la ulimwengu la haki za binadamu na mikataba yote ya kimataifa inayolinda haki hizo,” lakini hakuna ufafanuzi bayana wenye kuonyesha upekee wa "watu" dhidi ya "vitu"
Nne, ibara ya 6(4)(9) ya Katiba ya ACT Wazalendo (2015) inasema kwamba "utu" ni mojawapo ya "misingi kumi" ya chama," lakini hakuna ufafanuzi bayana wenye kuonyesha upekee wa "watu" dhidi ya "vitu"
Tano, ibara ya 7(1) ya Katiba ya NCCR(2014) inasema kwamba “misingi ya kisiasa ya chama” ni Pamoja na “kukubali itikadi ya utu ambayo lengo lake ni ujenzi wa jamii yenye uhuru, uzalendo, uadilifu, umoja, uwazi, uwajibikaji, haki za binadamu, usawa na ustawi wa jamii inayokubali kutegemeana kwa binadamu katika msingi wa mmoja kwa wote na wote kwa mmoja,” lakini hakuna ufafanuzi bayana wenye kuonyesha upekee wa "watu" dhidi ya "vitu"
Sita, na ibara ya 6(1)(a) ya CUF inasema kuwa Chama cha CUF kinaamini kwamba "binadamu ni mtu aliyeumbwa huru mwenye haki na uwezo wa kujiendeleza hadi upeo wake." wakati Ibara ya 6(1)(g) inasema kuwa "kila mtu ana wajibu wa kuheshimu utu, uhuru, na haki za wengine."
Lakini hakuna ufafanuzi bayana wenye kuonyesha upekee wa "watu" dhidi ya "vitu".
Saba, kifungu cha 2.2(d) cha Mtaala wa Elimu ya Msingi ulioandaliwa na Taasisi ya Elimu Tanzania, yaani "Tanzania Institute of Education" au TIE(2023), kinasema kwamba lengo mojawapo la elimu ya sekondari ni "to enable every Tanzanian to ... understand and protect national values, including dignity."
Lakini ndani mwake hakuna kipengele chochote, katika somo lolote, kinachotaja lengo la kumfundisha mwanafunzi wa Tanzania kuhusu tofauti kati ya "watu" na vitu," kama ambavyo somo la "Philosophy of Man," yaani "Anthropology," linafundisha.
Nane. kifungu cha 2.2(d) cha Mtaala wa Elimu ya Sekondari ulioandaliwa na Taasisi ya Elimu Tanzania, yaani "Tanzania Institute of Education" au TIE(2023), kinasema kwamba lengo mojawapo la elimu ya sekondari ni "to enable every Tanzanian to ... understand and protect national values, including dignity."
Lakini ndani mwake hakuna kipengele chochote, katika somo lolote, kinachotaja lengo la kumfundisha mwanafunzi wa Tanzania kuhusu tofauti kati ya "watu" na vitu," kama ambavyo somo la "Philosophy of Man," yaani "Anthropology," linafundisha.
Tisa, ukurasa wa kwanza wa Muhtasari wa somo la Uraia katika Elimu ya Sekondari ulioandaliwa na Taasisi ya Elimu Tanzania, yaani "Tanzania Institute of Education" au TIE(2023), kinasema kwamba "By the end of Form One the students should be able to... Demonstrate the ability to recognize and respect human rights and dignity";
Kwa upande wmingine kifungu cha 2.0(d) kinasema kwamba, "The general objectives of education in Tanzania are to ... develop and promote ... an understanding and respect for human dignity and human rights," ambapo katika muhtasari huu, neno "human rights" limetajwa mara 52.
Na sehemu ya 3.0 inayoeleza maudhui ya "human rights" inaongelea "aspects of Human Rights," "Limitations of Individual Human Rights," na " Human Rights Abuse."
Hivyo, ndani mwake hakuna kipengele chochote, katika somo lolote, kinachotaja lengo la kumfundisha mwanafunzi wa Tanzania kuhusu tofauti kati ya "watu" na vitu," kama ambavyo somo la "Philosophy of Man," yaani "Anthropology," linafundisha.
Kumi, muhtasari wa somo la "General Studies" kwa ajili ya A-Level, ulioandaliwa na Taasisi ya Elimu Tanzania, yaani "Tanzania Institute of Education" au TIE(2010), lakini ndani mwake hakuna kipengele chochote kinachotaja lengo la kumfundisha mwanafunzi wa Tanzania kuhusu tofauti kati ya "watu" na vitu," kama ambavyo somo la "Philosophy of Man," yaani "Anthropology," linafundisha.
Na kumi na moja, Propectus ya UDSM (2023/24), inataja kozi 42 chini ya "BA Development Studies Programme," kwenye ukurasa wa 366-67. Lakini, kozi hizi hazihusishi "Philosophy of Man," yaani "Anthropology," na hivyo kukosa maudhui ya kumwandaa mhitimu anayejua tofauti kati ya "watu" na "vitu." Huenda hata vyuo vikuu vingine vinayo dosari hiyo.
Kwa ujumla, jamii na serikali ya Watanzania haijaweka utaratibu rasmi wa kimtaala kwa ajili ya kujenga "imani ya jamii ambayo ni msingi wa jamii ya haki na amani" inayoanzia kwenye "itikadi ya ubidamu" inayosisitiza tofauti kati ya "watu" na "vitu", kama ambavyo somo la "Philosophy of Man," yaani "Anthropology," linataka tufundishe.
Waraka wa Papa Francis ni kipenga cha kutuamsha. Kazi hii tumewaachia wanateolojia peke yao wakati nchi yetu, serikali yetu na vyama vyetu vya siasa havina dini. Jambo hili sio sawa.
VI. Muhtasari na mapendekezo
Hivyo basi, kama Katiba ya nchi na katiba za vyama vya siasa havina "jawabu" kwa swali "What are the determinants of the uniqueness of humans as opposed to non-humans?" hii maana yake ni kwamba, ama tunapaswa kujibu swali hili leo au tunapaswa kukubaliana na jawabu la Papa Francis.
Kwa hiyo, swali linaloibuka mbele yetu ni hili: Je, jawabu lililotolewa katika Waraka "Dignitas Infinita" kwa ajili ya kujibu swali hili, linakubaliana na "misingi ya ubinadamu" inayohitajika kwa ajili ya kujenga, kukuza na kuhami umoja wa Taifa lisilo na dini rasmi, kama vile Tanzania?
Kama ni hapana: Je, tufanyeje ili kupata itikadi ya kitaifa inayotaja kwa ukamilifu na kwa ufasaha "sifa za ubindamu" zitakazokuwa kitako cha sera ya umoja wa kitaifa bila kujali dini, rangi, kabila, jinsi, jinsia au maelekeo ya ashiki ya mtu?
Nawaalika wanazuoni makini nchini Tanzania kujadili na kujibu swali hili kwa utulivu, na hasa wakati huu tunapoelekea kwenye zoezi la kuandaa ilani za uchaguzi wa serikali za mitaa mwaka 2024 na ilani za uchaguzi wa serikali kuu mwaka 2025.
Na mwisho, yafaa kukumbushana kwamba jina la waraka uitwao "Dignitas infinita" linatokana na nukuu ya Papa Yohane Paul II, tarehe 16 Novemba 1980, siku alipokuwa anaongelea walemavu.
Siku hiyo alitamka kwamba, "heshima ya binadamu haina mipaka," kwa maana kwamba, "[it] goes beyond all outward appearances or characteristics of people's concrete lives." Hivyo, kupitia waraka huu, Papa Francis amejaribu kujiweka karibu na wafuasi wa Papa Yohane Paul II, japo wamekuwa wanampopoa kila kukicha. Yaani:
"Dignitas Infinita" is a Latin phrase that means "infinite dignity". It refers to the dignity of every human being, which transcends all outward appearances and specific aspects of people’s lives1. The phrase is used to describe the principle that every human person has an infinite dignity that is inalienably based on their own being, beyond all circumstances and in whatever state or situation they may be. The phrase was first used by Pope John Paul II and then, by the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in the DEclaration bearing the title "Dignitas Infinita (2024)."
VII. Marejeo muhimu
Nimeambatanisha makala na vitabu vufuatavyo vilivyonisaidia kujenga uelewa wa kuandika makala hii:
- Antonia LoLordo(2019), Persons: A history (New York: Oxford University Press).
- Dorothy Day (199:22), On Pilgrimage (Michigan: Wiliam B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company)
- José Angel Lombo and Francesco Russo (2017), Philosophical Anthropology: An Introduction (Illinois, USA: Rev. James Socias).
- Juan Manuel Burgos (2018), An introduction to personalism (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press)
- Juan Manuel Burgos(2022), Personalist Anthropology: A Philosophical Guide to Life (Delaware, USA: Vernon Press).
- Karol Wojtyla (1979), The Acting Person: A Contribution to Phenomenological Anthropology (Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company)
- Linda Zagzebski(2001), "The Uniqueness of Persons," The Journal of Religious Ethics, 29.3:401-423.
- Phillip Honenberger (2015), Naturalism and Philosophical Anthropology: Nature, Life, and the Human between Transcendental and Empirical Perspectives (New York: Palgrave Macmillan).
Dr. Mama Amon
