Suchergebnisse

Through globalization humanity is becoming more and more mutually dependent and even united, but at the same time the multidimensional differences and gaps between us are appearing as a challenge to this connectedness. "No one can live only on food." (Lk 4, 4) are words that clearly witness that the connective tissue of humanity can't be only of economical and political nature. Also the pasture the media offer to people is too often just an instrument of the owners and not the fulfilment of media's proper function to cultivate and spread (capacity for knowing) the truth. At one hand the interweaving of ideological streams is (mis)used by new gurus for taking the possession of control. At the other hand the representatives of established religions and value systems are searching for formulas for a successful competition on the global market. What are then the possibilities and ways of survival, well being and life worth of human person in the contemporary increasingly complex condition? This question is from various scientific aspects and different (religious) horizons reflected upon in our book. Janez Juhant & Bojan Zalec, the editors

From the old times on, doubtless ethics presents an important part of philosophy, mainly as guidance for solving practical problems. In the times of big social changes the ethical questions arise anew. The current times of scientific and technological radical changes, of globalization and instability, demand up-to-date ethical discussion and answers. According to all the differences in the world, which occur because of the media and technological capabilities present in the consciousness of ordinary people, one should ask himself how to find the directions of the action and activity of an individual, of people, of humanity. And as a result of the rapid development of scientific and technological power, the things are becoming more and more complicated and potentially dangerous. What was in the past solved only by God and by the nature itself, it is today also essentially influenced by humans themselves. Hence, the ethics and morality are far more important as they used to be and they concern the survival of humanity as such. However, the authors in this book have been trying to face these problems.

Pitanje odnosa između osobe i prirode je modernoga porijekla, no ima svoje korijene u problemu (autentičnog) bitka (Sein), naročito ljudskog bitka (Dasein), što je ustvari jedno antropološ- ko pitanje. Osoba kao biće s logosom vlada sobom kao i drugima te prirodom. Kao simboličko biće osoba je suočena s teškim zadatkom pronalaska ravnoteže između nje i prirode. Ovo pitanje veze eskaliralo je u modernome dobu zbog isključive brige društva za znanost i tehniku, politički i ideološki vođenu prvenstveno kroz medijsko-tehnološki ovladan svijet, pri čemu nedostaju uvjeti za autentičan dijalog između osoba. No logos sâm mora održavati ravnotežu s obzirom na njegovu pravu prirodu a to je moguće jedino ako je osoba otvorena prema (svim) drugim osobama te dijaloški otvorena rješenjima svjetskih problema u kontekstu šire ljudske prirode. Ovaj tip odgovornosti ukorijenjen je u odgovoru: odgovaranje uključuje slušanje, a čuti znači ne samo slušati glasove drugih, nego i čuti njihova srca te osjetiti ih u punini vlastitoga bića. Ova simbolička zadaća duboko je duhovna. ; The issue of the relationship between person and nature is a modern one, but it has its roots in the problem of (genuine) Being (Sein), particularly the problem of the human being (Dasein), which is actually an anthropological question. Person as a being with logos governs herself as well as others and nature. As a symbolic being, she is confronted with the difficult task of finding a balance between herself and nature. The issue of this relationship escalated in the modern era because of society's exclusive concern with science and technology, which is primarily guided both politically and ideologically by a world ruled by media and technology. This world lacks the conditions for a genuine dialogue among persons. Yet logos itself has to maintain balance regarding its own true nature and this is possible only if a person is open to (all) other persons and dialogically open to solutions about the issues of the world in the context of a broader human nature. This type of responsibility is rooted in response. Responding includes hearing, and to hear means not only to listen to the voices of others, but also to hear their hearts and to feel them with one's entire being. This symbolic task is also deeply spiritual. ; Bien qu'elle ait ses racines dans le problème de l'(authentique) Être (Sein) et plus précisément dans celui de l'être humain (Dasein), la question de la relation entre la personne et la nature est un problème contemporain qui, à vrai dire, relève de l'anthropologie. En effet, une personne en tant qu'être doué de logos qui se gouverne, se gouverne aussi bien elle-même que les autres et la nature. En tant qu'être symbolique, la personne est confrontée à la difficile tâche de trouver un équilibre entre elle et la nature. Le problème de cette relation s'est intensifié dans l'ère moderne en raison de l'intérêt exclusif accordé par la société à la science et à la technologie, guidées toutes deux par une politique et une idéologie appartenant à un monde dirigé par une technologie médiatique qui néglige les conditions favorables pour un dialogue authentique entre les personnes. Or le logos lui-même doit maintenir cet équilibre en regard de sa véritable nature et cela est possible uniquement dans la mesure où la personne est ouverte aux autres personnes (dans leur totalité) et au dialogue, afin de trouver des solutions aux problèmes du monde dans un contexte plus large de nature humaine. Ce genre de responsabilité s'enracine dans une réponse : le répondre inclut l'écouter ; écouter ne signifie pas seulement entendre la voix des autres, mais aussi leur cœur en les ressentant dans la totalité de leur être. Cette tâche symbolique est profondément spirituelle. ; Die Frage der Beziehung zwischen einer Person und der Natur ist eine zeitgenössische Frage, jedoch schlägt sie ihre Wurzeln im Problem des ((eigentlichen) Seins), insbesondere des menschen (Dasein), was eigentlich eine anthropologische Frage ist. Eine Person als ein Wesen mit Logos regiert sich selbst ebenso wie die anderen und die Natur. Als ein symbolisches Wesen ist sie mit der diffizilen Aufgabe konfrontiert, ein Gleichgewicht zwischen sich selbst und der Natur zu finden. Dieses Beziehungsproblem eskalierte in der modernen Ära infolge des exklusiven Interesses der Gesellschaft an der Wissenschaft und Technologie, die politisch und ideologisch in erster Linie von einer medientechnologisch geregelten Welt gelenkt werden, wobei es an Voraussetzungen für einen echten Dialog zwischen den Personen mangelt. Jedoch muss der Logos selbst in Bezug auf dessen eigene wahre Natur das Gleichgewicht aufrechterhalten und dies ist nur möglich, wenn eine Person für (alle) andere(n) Personen und dialogisch für Lösungen der Weltprobleme in einem breiteren Kontext der menschlichen Natur offen ist. Diese Art von Verantwortung ist in einer Antwort verwurzelt: Eine Beantwortung umfasst das Zuhören, und zuhören heißt nicht nur, auf die Stimmen der anderen zu hören, sondern auch auf deren Herzen zu hören und sie mit dem ganzen eigenen Wesen zu fühlen. Diese symbolische Aufgabe ist zutiefst spirituell.

The book considers reconciliation from various points of view: biblical foundations of reconciliation, philosophical aspects, Girardian and Bonhoefferian reflections on reconciliation, intellectual and (post)totalitarian history, psychotherapeutic approaches . The authors consider reconciliation also in very concrete (historical) contexts (Hungary, Russia, Slovenia, Islam and Christianity). Despite some disagreements, their common message is clear: human history and present times are covered with blood, suffering (of innocent victims) and negative emotions. Hence the only acceptable way is cultivation of the culture of reconciliation

The ethical distress of the (post)modern world stimulates and directs us to reflect our ethical and cultural grounds. Man is a transcendent being. He cannot reach or put in order immediate goods he needs if he is not prepared to acknowledge the grounds of his person and develop the virtues of prudence, love, hope, faith, wisdom, justice, courage, temperance etc. These are ethical questions concerning different worldviews and cannot be solved only by scientific methods. Many people who in the past did not care for religion as such, now take seriously religious personal and societal aspects of humane life. The fundamental crucial questions of man are ethical questions. They are in various ways related or perplexed with the question of faith and of science.