U radu se analizira Talesovo shvaćanje duše, uz primarno oslanjanje na Aristotelove kapitalne uvide i konzultiranje relevantnih doksografskih bilješki. Istraživanjem je utvrđeno da je Stagiranin miletskog fizičara, uzimajući u obzir njegovo navodno stajalište da kamen ima dušu zato što pokreće željezo, situirao u kategoriju mislilaca koji su smatrali da je duša načelo kretanja. Autor je zatim konstatirao da je mišljenje da je duša pomiješana u cjelini povezano s poznatom sintagmom koja se pripisuje Talesu: »sve je puno bogova«. Ako se ove (...) formulacije povežu s izjavama o kamenu magnetu i jantaru, onda se dobiva mogući zaključak da je, po Milećaninu, sve oduševljeno, tj. oživljeno, kako organski tako i neorganski dijelovi kozmosa. Konačno, ako ovi stavovi jesu autentično Talesovi, onda je on »rodonačelnik filozofije« i zbog toga što govori o jednosti čitave stvarnosti, odnosno zato što se na ovaj način vitalistički ustanovljuje jedinstvo cjeline svega. (shrink)

The paper analyses fragmentarily preserved views of Empedocles, that, in the author’s opinion, represent the antecedents of deviations from the anthropocentric vision of the world and anticipate the majority of later attempts at scientific, philosophical, and legal modifications of the status of all living beings. Empedocles, namely, claims that all beings think, i.e., that they have understanding or consciousness. He is, moreover, portrayed as a proponent of the thesis that plants as well have both intellect and the ability to think, (...) and that they are driven by desire and have feelings, sadness and joy. According to him, the idea that the whole nature is akin not only has a vital-animal meaning but, to a certain extent, a mental meaning. Empedocles urged his disciples to abstain from consuming ensouled beings, since it is in the bodies of these beings that penalized souls reside. He believed that he himself was one of them who had been killed and eaten, and that it is by purification that prior sins in connection with food should be treated. Empedocles’ case shows that humans are living beings that err, and that they owe to animals justice based on mutual kinship. Aside from living a pure life, practicing the recommended katharmoi, and abstaining from flesh in any version, the path to the salvation of the soul leads through two additional dimensions. The first is being revealed in the important phrase of the sage from Acragas that one should fast from evil. And secondly, the wealth of divine thoughts is connected with being happy, just as those who have vague opinions about the gods are wretched. Eventually, the “Sicilian Muse” believed that if people live in a holy and just manner, they shall be blessed in this life, even more so after leaving this one, because they will achieve happiness that will not be temporarily, and be able to rest for eternity. (shrink)

Advocates of the questioning of the dominant anthropocentric perspective of the world have been increasingly strongly presenting ethical demands for a new solution of the relationship between humans and other beings, saying that adherence to the Western philo-sophical and theological traditions has caused the current environmental, and not just environmental, crisis. The attempts are being made to establish a new relationship by relativizing the differences between man and the non-human living beings, often by attributing specifically human traits and categories, such (...) as dignity, moral status and rights to non-human living beings. The author explores antecedents of the standpoints that deviate from the mainstream Western philosophy, in terms of non-anthropocentric extension of ethics, and finds them in the fragments of first physicists, which emphasize kinship of all varieties of life. Pythagoras, Empedocles, Anaxagoras and Democritus, in this context, considered certain animals and plants as sacred, i.e. they believed that they are, in a sense, responsible for what they do and that they apart from being able to be driven by a natural desire, being able to breathe, feel, be sad and happy, also have a soul, power of discernment, awareness, the ability to think, understanding and mind. Finally, the author believes that solutions or mitigation of the mentioned crisis are not in the simple Aesopeian levelling of animals and plants "upwards", but in an adequate paideutic approach which in humans will develop an inherent ethical model of accepting non-human living beings as creatures who deserve moral and decent treatment and respect. (shrink)

The author analyses normative acts regulating the protection of animals, both at the national level (especially in the Republic of Serbia) and at the level of supranational organisations and state unions (the Council of Europe and the European Union), but also attempts to conceptualise the terms used in the documents observing the protection of animals. From the practical and philosophical perspective, this paper considers the terms (I) “animal” (“any vertebrate animal capable of experiencing pain, suffering, fear and stress”), (II) “welfare” (...) (“the provision of conditions in which animals can exercise their physiological and other species-specific needs”), (III) “abuse” (“any treatment or disregard of animals, that causes pain, suffering, fear, stress, injury, damages the genetic integrity of the animal and causes death intentionally or through negligence”), and other terms relevant to understanding the prevailing anthropocentric approach to animals. The paper also examines the difficulties in implementing the adopted legislation on the protection and welfare of animals caused by an insufficiently internalised sensitivity of official institutions as well as citizens towards so-called non-human living beings. In the author’s view, it is important that they do not fall below the achieved civilisational standards of ethical and moral culture in their cognitions and insights, and that they consider various topics related to animals with due caution and awareness of the dilemmas they may encounter in their professional work and lives. An appropriate pluriperspective approach and a consciousness of responsibility should eventually lead to a more sensitive attitude of said subjects towards the non-human part of the animal creation. (shrink)

Advocates of the questioning of the dominant anthropocentric perspective of the world have been increasingly strongly presenting ethical demands for a new solution of the relationship between humans and other beings, saying that adherence to the Western philosophical and theological traditions has caused the current environmental, and not just environmental, crisis. The attempts are being made to establish a new relationship by relativizing the differences between man and the non-human living beings, often by attributing specifically human traits and categories, such (...) as dignity, moral status and rights to non-human living beings. The author explores antecedents of the standpoints that deviate from the mainstream Western philosophy, in terms of non-anthropocentric extension of ethics, and finds them in the fragments of first physicists, which emphasize kinship of all varieties of life. Pythagoras, Empedocles, Anaxagoras and Democritus, in this context, considered certain animals and plants as sacred, i.e. they believed that they are, in a sense, responsible for what they do and that they apart from being able to be driven by a natural desire, being able to breathe, feel, be sad and happy, also have a soul, power of discernment, awareness, the ability to think, understanding and mind. Finally, the author believes that solutions or mitigation of the mentioned crisis are not in the simple Aesopeian levelling of animals and plants "upwards", but in an adequate paideutic approach which in humans will develop an inherent ethical model of accepting non-human living beings as creatures who deserve moral and decent treatment and respect. (shrink)

Istraživanje demonstriranja »pravde« u Homerovoj Odiseji od strane kraljeva ili sudaca u stvarnim situacijama toga doba, pokazalo je da je riječ o postupcima u partikularnoj formi, a ne o apstraktno pojmljenim principima. Ovi su postupci rješavali uvijek konkretne i specifične ad hoc situacije, a nisu primjenjivali depersonalizirane i općevažeće zakone, te se njihova uloga iscrpljivala u pregovaračkom postupku i nagodbi rivalskih strana. Namjera im je bila da nanovo uspostave destabiliziranu ustaljenost življenja običajnosne zajednice, pa se može reći da je spomenuta (...) procedura de facto predstavljala »pravdu« koja se primjenjivala u danom kontekstu. Zaključak autora jest da ovako shvaćena »pravda« nije bila ništa drugo do odgovarajuća metodologija, tj. pravilo konzerviranja postojećih običaja, ili naprosto korekcija narušenog modusa egzistiranja u nekom polisu.Research of demonstration of “justice” in Homer’s Odyssey by kings or magistrates in actu­al situations of the time, showed that these were particular procedures rather than abstractconcepts, always applied to resolve concrete and specific ad hoc situations and never to thedepersonalized and general laws, so their role was being exhausted in the course of negotiati­ons and settlement of rival parties. Their intention was to reestablish destabilized continuity ofmorality-based community, therefore it can be said that the mentioned procedure de facto repre­sented “justice” applied to a given context. The author concludes that the concept of “justice”in this sense was merely a suitable methodology, i.e. the rule of conservation of existing mores,or simply a correction of a violated mode of existence in a certain polis. (shrink)

Autor u radu analizira predsokratovsko razmatranje φρόνησις-a i αἴσθησις-a, promatrano kroz prizmu Aristotelovog poricanja logoskih sposobnosti životinjama i biljkama. Aristotelov generalni stav je da većina predsokratovaca nije razlučivala um, mišljenje i razboritost od opažanja i drugih aspekata duše. Bitnu aporiju u promišljanju predsokratovaca Stagiranin obrazlaže tvrdnjom da su oni, doduše, istraživali istinu bića, ali polazeći od pretpostavke da su jedina zbiljska bića osjetilne stvari. Predsokratovci, sukladno tomu, shvaćaju umovanje kao nešto tjelesno poput opažanja i često razumiju da se slično sličnim (...) opaža i shvaća. Očekivana konsekvenca ovakvog pristupa tvrdnja je predsokratovaca da ne samo ljudi nego i sva ostala bića imaju svijest, mišljenje i razboritost. Do krajnosti doveden stav nekih od njih izražava se riječima da se biljke pokreću po prirodnoj žudnji, da dišu, osjećaju, da mogu biti tužne i vesele, kao i da imaju moć rasuđivanja, razum i um. Autor je zaključio da je predsokratovac Alkmeon razlikovanjem mišljenja tj. razboritosti od opažanja najjasnije anticipirao Aristotelovo vlastito stajalište. Alkmeonova tvrdnja da se čovjek razlikuje od drugih živih bića po tome što on jedini razumije, dok druga živa bića primaju osjete, ali ne razumiju, na tragu je Stagiraninovog naglašavanja da se logoske sposobnosti mogu pripisivati isključivo ljudima i da čovjek ima ontološki primat u odnosu na druga živa bića. (shrink)

Abortion and euthanasia are still one of the greatest bioethical challenges. Previous studies have shown that there are differences in attitudes towards these issues depending on socio-demographic characteristics and socio-cultural environment (country of residence). As part of the scientific research project EuroBioMed, we compared the attitudes of students from three Mediterranean countries towards abortion and euthanasia and examined them from the perspective of Mediterranean bioethics. A pen-to-paper survey was conducted on a convenient sample of students (N = 1097) from five (...) universities and four fields of study (Medicine, Law, Theology and Philosophy) in Croatia, Greece and Italy to investigate their attitudes towards abortion and euthanasia. Three hypotheses were tested using t-test and ANOVA for differences in attitudes according to country, field of study, year of study, gender, religiosity, political orientation, financial status, and size of place of residence. While attitudes towards abortion were not statistically significantly different between students from different countries, the analysis showed that students from Italy had more liberal attitudes towards euthanasia. Theology students had more conservative attitudes towards both abortion and euthanasia, while there were no differences between the other groups. Women, final year students, non-religious and politically left-oriented students had more liberal attitudes. The results provided an insight into students’ attitudes towards abortion and euthanasia. Knowledge of the attitudes of these future experts can be valuable for the discussion of these issues. These results also provided a basis for a better understanding of the construct of Mediterranean bioethics. (shrink)