Steven Pinker追隨Ruth Macklin的「尊嚴無用論」，嚴詞批判「人性尊嚴」概念，認為這是保守派箝制科技發展的工具。本文反對 其論述，肯定「尊嚴」概念的合理與必要性。文分六節，第二節說明 Pinker反對「尊嚴」的主要理由，第三節進行初步回應，首先指出保 守不保守不應作為倫理討論的用語，其次，Pinker對「尊嚴」的反對 似乎是問題的錯置。第四與第五節分別探討Pinker以及他眼中保守 派所理解的「尊嚴」。最後一節則有系統地批判Pinker。本文主張，「自主原則」不能取代「尊嚴」概念。相反的，它必須以之為基礎， 才能獲得本身的證成。此外，「自主原則」也不足以提供沒有自主能 力者的保護。要保護沒有自主能力的人，必須先肯定所有的人都有同 樣的人性尊嚴，無論智愚強弱、男女老少。

Following Ruth Macklin, Steven Pinker fiercely criticized the concept of dignity in his provocative article entitled “The Stupidity of Dignity.” He contended that dignity is the most dangerous ploy conservative thinkers could take to oppress the progress of biomedical research. Divided into five parts, this article argues against Pinker’s ideas. Firstly, the main reasons why Pinker objected to dignity are impartially presented and then, in the second part, two initial responses are given. One is concerned with the term “conservative” he regularly used. I believe that it is better for the participants of ethical forum to avoid its application because this term tends to blur, not to sharpen the right focus of ethical discussions on the rightness and wrongfulness of controversial issues at stake and the legitimacy of underlying arguments. Furthermore, I also believe that he battled in the wrong field by not questioning the personhood of human embryos but criticizing the concept of dignity as a foundation of ethical discussion. In the third and fourth parts the interpretations of the concept “dignity” by Pinker and by the so-called conservatives are separately introduced and critically reviewed. My thesis against Pinker is then systematically expounded in the fifth and last parts.