Empedocles on Ensouled Beings Kaluđerović, Željko
Conatus - journal of philosophy,
06/2023, Letnik:
8, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
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.
Advocates of the questioning of the dominant anthropocentric perspective of the world have been increasingly strongly presenting (bio)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 (bio)ethical model of accepting non-human living beings as creatures who deserve moral and decent treatment and respect.
The Declaration on Human Cloning was adopted at the 82nd United Nations plenary meeting on 8 March 2005. This Declaration crowned the efforts taken by France and Germany since 2001 to adopt a ...convention against the so-called reproductive human cloning. The negotiation was initially conceived as a bioethical debate that should have led to a general agreement to ban human cloning. However, more often, it took the form of a discussion on human rights, cultural, civil and religious differences among people, their interaction and the question of who or what has priority in case of potential conflicts among heterogeneous value systems. Neither the Declaration nor the negotiations gave any answers to these difficult questions, but they did allow superficial insight into the problems. They showed that international legislation falls into apories when professional argumentation does not prevail in conflicting attitudes, i.e. when political and other differences are in the middle of the dialogue. If one reads the Declaration carefully, it has an unexpected result since, because of its generality and attempts to establish a compromise between difficult-to-combine interests and definitions, it neither defines cloning of people nor prohibits it directly and unconditionally, including cloning for reproductive purposes. Finally, maybe it would have been better if the debate on the cloning controversies and subsequent comprehensive regulations were first left to scientists, philosophers and corresponding expert bodies and panels, who would explain the basic mechanisms of the cloning process and, more importantly, the bioethical implications of the process itself,
The paper considers the validity of cheating in sports and the consequences of such practices, especially in football. The focus of the research is, first of all, the controversial thesis of some ...philosophers that cheating can make the sport more dynamic and attractive to the audience and thus indirectly generate greater benefits to its stakeholders. The authors are of the opinion that cheating within any framework of ‘flexibility’ of the rules cannot be (bio)ethically justified or morally acceptable since the idea of sports competition as such would be delegitimised. They then analyse in the text the specific act of cheating made by Thierry Henry in a match between France and the Republic of Ireland as part of the UEFA second round of qualification for the 2010 FIFA World Cup. The authors conclude that, by helping to score a goal on fraud and later refusing to admit his wrongdoing, the French striker derogated the constitutive rules of football and sportsmanship rules, violated the reference moral values in sport and the fair play dimension, and questioned the integrity of the activity itself, i.e., the game.
U ovom radu analiziraju se normativni akti regulacije zaštite životinja na razini nacionalnih država (posebno Republike Srbije) i na razini nadnacionalnih organizacija i saveza država (Europsko ...vijeće i Europska unija). Autor posebni naglasak stavlja na pojmovnu artikulaciju izraza upotrijebljenih u dokumentima koji opserviraju zaštitu životinja. U članku se, iz praktičko-filozofijske perspektive, razmatraju pojmovi: (I) »životinja« (»svaki kralježnjak koji je u stanju osjećati bol, patnju, strah i stres«); (II) »dobrobit« (»osiguravanje uvjeta u kojima životinja može ostvariti svoje fiziološke i druge potrebe svojstvene vrsti«); (III) »zlostavljanje« (»svako postupanje ili nepostupanje sa životinjama kojim se namjerno ili iz nehaja izaziva bol, patnja, strah, stres, povreda, narušava genetska cjelovitost životinje i izaziva smrt«), kao i druge riječi koje su relevantne za razumijevanje dominantno antropocentričkog pristupa životinjama. Također, istražuju se teškoće s implementacijom postojećih zakona o zaštiti i dobrobiti životinja, koje su uvjetovane nedovoljno interioriziranim senzibilitetom kako službenih institucija, tako i građana – prema tzv. ne-ljudskim živim bićima. Autor pritom ističe da je veoma važno da institucije, kao i ljudi koji ih čine, postojećim spoznajama i uvidima ne zalaze ispod dostignutih civilizacijskih standarda etičko-moralne kulture te da različite teme u vezi odnosa prema životinjama promišljaju uz dužan oprez i svjesnost dilema s kojima se mogu susresti u profesionalnom radu i životu. Odgovarajući pluriperspektivni pristup, kao i svijest o odgovornosti, trebali bi rezultirati delikatnijim odnosom navedenih subjekata prema ne-ljudskom dijelu živih stvorenja.
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.
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.
Biotehnologija, genetički inženjering, transgeni ili genetički modificirani organizmi (GMO) izazivaju brojne kontroverze širom zemljine kugle u posljednjih dvadesetak godina. Znanstvene studije o ...produkciji i upotrebi GMO-a, premda nemaju jednoznačan aksiološki predznak niti nude simplificirane odgovore na iskazane dileme, pokazuju da GM hrana donosi mogući rizik po ljudsko zdravlje, štetan utjecaj na okruženje i generalno pogoršanje kvalitete poljoprivrednih kultura. Ovome treba dodati i klasična bioetička pitanja u vezi s potencijalno nenadoknadivom štetom koju sadašnjoj, ali i budućim generacijama, može donijeti na ovakav način izmijenjeno biološko nasljeđe. Implementacija ove, kako je njeni pobornici nazivaju, najbrže usvojene biljne tehnologije u modernoj historiji čovječanstva, ugrožava, sa socijalne strane gledano, tradicionalnu poljoprivrednu proizvodnju i produbljuje i onako veliku društvenu nejednakosti između bogatih i siromašnih farmera. Evidentne su, također, intervencije velikih država i biotehnoloških kompanija prilikom donošenja ili korigiranja odgovarajućih zakona i uredbi o GMO-u, koje, iako deklarativno naglašavaju opće potrebe i zajedničku dobrobit, ustvari (ne)vješto prikrivaju vlastite partikularne interese. Analize mnogih znanstvenika i bioetičara, konačno, pokazuju da teza da će „genska revolucija” riješiti problem gladi u svijetu jednostavno nije dokazana u protekla dva desetljeća.
Biotechnology, genetic engineering, transgenic or genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have caused numerous controversies around the globe over the last twenty years. Scientific studies on the production and use of GMOs, although they do not have a uniform axiological sign nor offer simplified answers to expressed dilemmas, show that GM food poses a potential risk to human health, detrimental environmental impact, and general deterioration in the quality of agricultural crops. Classical bioethical questions regarding the potentially irreversible damage the biological heritage altered in this way can bring to the present, but also future generations should be added to this. The implementation of this, as its supporters call it, fastest-adopted plant technology in the modern history of humankind threatens, from the social aspect, traditional agricultural production and deepens the already great social inequalities between rich and poor farmers. There are also apparent interventions by large states and biotechnological companies when adopting or correcting appropriate laws and regulations on GMOs, which, although declaratively emphasizing general needs and the common good, in fact (un)skilfully conceal their own particular interests. Analyses made by many scientists and bioethicists, finally, show that the thesis that a “gene revolution” will resolve the problem of hunger in the world was not justified in the previous two decades.
In this paper, the author tries to identify the level of autonomy of Sremski Karlovci Grammar School in creating its curricula, particularly for philosophical subjects, since its establishment in ...1791 until 1921. Although it might be considered that the teaching of philosophical subjects, during the first 130 years of the history of Sremski Karlovci Grammar School, automatically followed the changes of curricula, in reality this was not the case. Moreover, it seems that the teaching of philosophy in Sremski Karlovci Grammar School had a specific evolution, relatively independent of implemented curricula, which is confirmed by the analysis of its “Programmes” and “Reports”. For example, even though that there were two different curricula implemented in the school from 1792 to 1825, the same philosophical subjects were taught: Logics and Ethics (they were also taught within curriculum for 1849/50 school year and 1850/51 school year). From 1825 until 1847/8 school year, Logics was probably the only philosophical subject taught in the Grammar School, even though two curricula were implemented in this period as well. In the school year 1853/54 a new curriculum was introduced in Sremski Karlovci Grammar School, according to which the teaching of philosophy subjects was sublimated into one subject, Philosophical Propedeutics. During the following two school years (1854 and 1855) this school subject comprised the lectures on Logics, Psychology, Metaphysics, and History of Logics. From 1856 school year until the end of the analyzed period, only two courses were held on Philosophical Propedeutics: Logics and Psychology. Within these 65 years there were many changes of the names of these subjects, as well as the scope of their teachings, sequences of lectures and literature; however they rarely coincided with changes of curricula, as well as of adopted laws, regulations, and decrees.
PDF
