Suchergebnisse

Papa Ivan Pavao II. bio je na čelu Katoličke crkve od 16. listopada 1978. do 2. travnja 2005. Od samoga dolaska na Petrovu stolicu dao je do znanja da želi biti blizak svim ljudima i svim narodima na svijetu pokazujući razumijevanje i izgrađujući povjerenje prema svima. Ubrzo su svi narodi i svi ljudi na cijeloj zemaljskoj kugli postali njegovi sugovornici. U prvoj polovici svoga papinskog služenja trudio se približiti ljude i narode jedne drugima, bez obzira kojemu su političkom bloku pripadali. Poslije promjena, devedesetih godina 20. stoljeća, u svijetu se neumorno zalagao za zaštitu malih naroda, kultura, posebnosti i svakoga pojedinca u svijetu globalizacije. Bio je čovjek ekumenizma i dijaloga. Bio je neumoran u izgrađivanju mira među narodima. Do posljednjega časa svoga života nije prestajao isticati važnost ljudskoga života i čovjekova dostojanstva. Znao je vješto komunicirati sa svim osobama, bez obzira na dob, spol, vjersku pripadnost, naciju, rasu ili društveni status. ; Pope John Paul II was the Head of the Catholic Church from October, 16th 1978 till April, 2nd, 2005. When he took over Peter's Chair he put on notice that he wanted to be close to all people and all nations in the world showing the understanding and building trust with everyone. Soon all the nations and all the people around the world became his collocutors. In the first part of his pontifical serving he tried to bring closer people and nations, regardless of which political block they belonged to. After changes in the nineteen nineties, he untiringly pleaded for the protection of "little" people, cultures, particularities and every individual in the world of globalization. He was a man of ecumenism and dialogue. He was tireless in building peace among nations. Till the last moment of his life he didn't stop with emphasizing the importance of a human life and a man's dignity. He knew how to communicate with every person, regardless of age, sex, religious affiliation, nation, race or social status.

In Hobbes' Theory of Authorization I it was shown how Hobbes, by means of his theory of authorization, managed to resolve the difficult points which, in the previous formulations of his science of politics, weighed on the issue of creation of the state conceived as a doubly impersonal apparatus relying on the representative relation between the sovereign & the subjects. In this text the author re-examines both the approach & the conclusion of his research through critical inquiry into Quentin Skinner's & Hanna Pitkin's interpretations of Hobbes' understanding of representation. In his recent works, Skinner attempted to demonstrate that it had to be interpreted, above all, as an instrument in the ideological conflict between the republicans & the monarchists in England in Hobbes' time. Hanna Pitkin, in turn, brought into question the representative character of sovereign power. As opposed to both of them, the author expounds the thesis that, in order to be understood properly, the theory of authorization must be examined within the more comprehensive framework of Hobbes' science of politics & thus brought in connection with other important elements of its problem-matter, such as the right to punish, the relation between the sovereign's rights & the subjects' freedom, & the duties of the sovereign. By interpreting the theory of authorization primarily as part of a system which is conditioned by & co-formative of the logic of the study as a whole, this text strives to show that the authorization-based relation between the sovereign & the subjects, in spite of the fact that one-sided authorization on the part of the subjects established a sovereign who has no legal obligations to them, is indeed determined by the logic of representation. Adapted from the source document.