خلاصة:
In connection with human dignity and rights of women، Kant and Mill retain a same viewpoint، i.e.، they appretiate that women own intrinsically human values. They also reject instrumental usage of women، but in relation to women’s social and political rights، their ways are separated: Kant considers women as man’s property and passive citizens. He denies the social and political rights of women. Conversely، Mill defends women’s social and political rights on the bases of liberty and equality. So، Kant’s standpoints on human dignity of women on the one hand، and their social and political rights on the other، suffer from contradiction، while Mill’s thoughts are consistence in this context. One can understand the essence of difference between these two philosopher’s notions by using hermeneutic method (text and context). The controversy on women’s rights mainly emerges from effects of historical developments particularly economic، social and political affairs، within Kant’s and Mill’s thoughts.
ملخص الجهاز:
Consequently, Kant’s views on the human dignity of women are contradictory to his views on their social and political rights, while Mill’s thoughts in this regard are consistent.
com Introduction The thoughts and views of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) and John Stuart Mill (1804-1873) on the human and legal dignity of women have sparked numerous discussions and criticisms, especially from the nineteenth century to the present day.
In this research, a hypothesis is tested as follows: The anthropological foundations of Kant and Mill regarding the human and legal dignity of women are common, but the difference in the views of these two philosophers regarding the social and political status of women has been shaped under the influence of the historical developments of each era.
On the other hand, a comparative method has been used to depict and explain the similarities and dissimilarities of Kant and Mill's views on human dignity and social and political rights of women.
Thus, Kant blocks the way of instrumental use of the human species, including women and men, so that the dignity of man as a person and intrinsic end is properly recognized (Ibid: 167-166).
Likewise, as Kant writes in the article “Judgment and Action,” man is free as a human being, equal as a subject, and independent as a citizen; but women lack political freedom and are not considered active citizens.
In this view, women are not considered part of a man’s property, but rather have rights and play a social and political role.
(
, 
, 
)
