Ivana Zagorac

In philosophical literature, the complex emotional state of ressentiment gained popularity through the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche. According to Nietzsche, ressentiment was a bad feeling that reflected the suppressed anger, the pain of impotence, and the general misery of the weak when they compared themselves to the strong and talented members of society. Max Scheler took up Nietzsche’s thesis and described ressentiment as a complex condition characterised by a thirst for revenge. Moreover, ressentiment has the annoying property of presenting itself as having some merit: the modern social and political context offers more than enough examples. First, the aim of this article is to take a closer look at Nietzsche’s ‘man of ressentiment,’ an odious personality characterised by weakness, deep frustrations, and hypocrisy. It will turn out that ressentiment has many different shades that paint a somewhat different picture and raise philosophical questions about positive valuation, vulnerability, and the sense of injustice. Second, we shall be working on the link between the psychology of ressentiment and the temptation to lack integrity in writing, art, or science. The well-described and well-known fact that academic fraudsters evolve in disguise, that they first reactively endorse values very different from their own values, and that these plagiarist authors, second, embark on long-term projects repeating their misdeeds and errors, as if it were normal, are two facts worthy of our attention.

It is well known that Hume excluded inferior rational beings, who are incapable of resistance and weak resentment, from his concept of justice. This resulted in a critique of Hume’s theory of justice, as it would not protect those who were the most vulnerable against ill treatment. The typical answer to this critique is that Hume excluded inferior rational beings from the concept of justice, but not from that of morality, and that he considered their protection to be the task of humanity. The subject of this text is the range of Hume’s humanity. What manner of protection does Hume’s humanity truly offer? Despite the conclusion that this manner of protection of the vulnerable is insufficient, Hume’s humanity contains valuable characteristics worthy of re-evaluation in modern debate — both on the limits of humanity and on the conditions and models of protecting the vulnerable

It seems that the revitalisation of Fritz Jahr’s thought has come just at the right time. During the course of its rapid development, bioethics managed to assume different forms, but also to become both reduced in its underlying intention and hyper-specialised in its theoretical and practical aspects. Summed up in his bioethical imperative, Fritz Jahr’s thought prompts us to re-examine both its underlying intention and its field of interest. Accordingly, this paper centres on Jahr’s bioethical imperative, its origins, construction and implications, aiming to scrutinise Jahr’s original thought and his message within the contemporary discourse on bioethics in general and that on integrative bioethics in particular. The latter is examined only in its outlines, leaving room for a possible upgrade. Lastly, the paper looks at the Rijeka Declaration as a document that represents an attempt to both conceptually and methodologically transform contemporary bioethics within the context of Jahr’s thought.*

The paper analyses the role of Albert Schweitzer in the antinuclear movement during the 1950s and 1960s. Having come face to face with the unthinkable threat of nuclear destruction, Schweitzer joins with renowned scientists to raise public awareness about the necessity of banning nuclear testing. Schweitzer applies the view summed up in the concept of reverence for life to a question of global importance, insisting on the personal responsibility of each individual for the present and future generations. His contribution to the antinuclear movement also sheds light on the decisive role of the movement in the formation of the field of bioethics. In conclusion, the authoress points to the need for redefining the origins of bioethics.Das Paper analysiert die Rolle Albert Schweitzers im Rahmen der Anti-Atomkraft-Bewegung der 50er- bzw. 60er-Jahre. Konfrontiert mit einer bis dahin undenkbaren Bedrohung der atomaren Zerstörung gesellt sich Schweitzer den namhaften Wissenschaftlern hinzu, um die Bewusstseinsbildung der Öffentlichkeit für die Unabdingbarkeit einer Atomtestsperre zu stärken. Schweitzer appliziert die im Konzept der Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben resümierte Anschauung auf eine Frage von weltumspannendem Belang, indem er hierbei auf individueller Verantwortung eines jeglichen Einzelnen für gegenwärtige und angehende Generationen beharrt. Sein Beitrag zur Anti-Atomkraft-Bewegung bringt Licht in die ausschlaggebende Rolle dieser Front in der Formung des Bereichs der Bioethik. Abschließend weist die Autorin auf das Erfordernis einer Neubestimmung des Ursprungs der Bioethik

Razlika između prikaza vrhunskog sportaša nekad i danas možda se najbolje ocrtava u točki susreta kiborg-teorije i studija o sportu. Rekonceptualizacija pojma ‘sportaš’ u tome se smislu otvara kao pomak od ‘prirodnoga’ ka ‘umjetnom’. Tijekom ljudske povijesti vrhunski sportaši uvijek su bili doživljavani kao na određeni način ‘ne-prirodni’ i slavljeni kao heroji koji su nadvladali granice svojih prirodnih tijela. Današnji sportski događaji privlače više gledatelja nego ikada ranije, a oštra konkurencija podiže i same standarde i kriterije natjecanja. Sportovi koji privlače mase gledatelja već su odavno predstave ‘nakaza’; gledateljima na stadionima ili pred televizorom u udobnosti njihovih domova gotovo je nemoguće zamisliti da bi i sami ikad mogli postići tako super-mišićavo tijelo sa super-brzim refleksima. Staromodni krv, znoj i suze još su uvijek negdje prisutni, iako inkorporirani u napredna dostignuća moderne tehno-kulture. Mnoštvo pitanja koja proizlaze iz takve perspektive pronašla su svoje mjesto za raspravu u relativno novom pluriperspektivnom pristupu izazovima biotehnološkog doba – bioetici. Bioetika nudi platformu za dijalog o bitnim pitanjima današnjice, dijalog koji nadrasta disciplinarne, stručne, historijske i kulturološke pozicije. Takav diskurs suočava se, međutim, sa pluralizmom u pristupima kao i metodološkim barijerama te pretpostavlja stvaranje odgovarajuće teorijske podloge. Ovaj rad će izdvojiti samo neke problemske točke koje u području sporta plastično ocrtavaju nedostatnosti postojećih monoperspektivno orijentiranih koncepcija. U tome smislu, naglasit će se samo neki simptomi koji ukazuju na dezorijentiranost svakodnevnog življenja, a koji se na osoben način prikazuju u sportu: krhkost etičkih pozicija sadržanih u konceptima »duha sporta« i fair playa u sučeljavanju sa znanstveno-tehničkim napretkom, objektivacija tijela, te porast interesa za aktivnostima visokog rizika. U ovome radu navedena obilježja razumijevaju se kao znakovi potrebe za nadilaženjem redukcionističkih i monoperspektivnih pristupa, donedavno dominantnih, a koje osobit bioetički pristup ima mogućnosti nadići

The need for philosophical practice to integrate various methods, both conceptual and those based on the use of emotions, raises the question as to whether its methodology is necessarily eclectic, in terms of the collection of various methodologies used in philosophy, or whether there is a way to move beyond eclecticism. This is the main subject of this paper. In other words, the question is whether there is such a thing as an ‘integrative’ methodology and, if so, what distinguishes such a method from mere eclecticism. In this text, we define the methodological procedure of integrativeness as the process of systematizing perspectives into an orientational answer to the demands of a specific problem. What differentiates such an approach from mere summation is a new contribution that results from a synergistic and systematic meeting of positions and argumentations whose final result differs from its initial elements. Diversity in the form of a multidimensional relationship towards life and the world results in numerous perspectives, which is a value that should be cultivated and integrated into a reflective and actional perception of the world.

Zamah neoplatonističkih koncepcija i oživljavanje ideala antike uz zdušnu potporu petrarkističke lirike, u humanizmu i renesansi uzvisuju ženu na način nepojmljiv za srednjovjekovlje. Dubrovačko zakonodavstvo, već od ranije pod prevladavajućim utjecajem Crkve, bilježi značajne promjene u pozicioniranju žene u društvu, dok nove misaone orijentacije snažno utječu i na kulturni život. Tako se u Dubrovniku pojavljuju i prve pjesnikinje, a konstruira se i prvi mit o ženi, onaj o Cvijeti Zuzorić. Upravo njen suvremenik i dragi prijatelj Nikola Vitov Gučetić, svojim radovima svjedoči novu mogućnost – ženski glas uklopljen u filozofski koncept i promoviran potpisom uglednog Dubrovčanina. Gučetić otvara prostor svog ljetnikovca, zaštićenog mjesta za »časna proučavanja«, dvjema ženama za njihove razgovore o ljepoti i ljubavi, a posvetu objavljenim Dijalozima upućuje još jednoj »vrlo dičnoj i prepoštovanoj gospoji«, Cvijetinoj sestri Niki. Time svojoj supruzi Maruši Gundulić i Cvijeti Zuzorić posredovano daje glas, ali i ime. U stilskom susretu pjesničkog i filozofskog, prožimanju aktera i interpretatora, premošćivanju od bogova do Boga, Gučetić prolazi tragovima autoriteta iz dobro mu znane filozofske tradicije, opredjeljujući se ipak već i samim podnaslovom za promišljanje ljubavi »u Platonovu duhu«. Ovaj rad otkriće žene prezentirano kroz ženski glas dovodi u vezu s Gučetićevim stavovima iznesenim u Upravljanju obitelji, djelu objavljenom desetak godina nakon Dijaloga o ljepoti i Dijaloga o ljubavi. Poseban naglasak stavljen je na Gučetićevo tematiziranje pojma ljubavi i snagu argumenata korištenih u rješavanju zagonetke moći, izvorišta i kompleksnosti ljubavi.

Le renouveau de la pensée de Fritz Jahr semble arriver au bon moment. Au cours de son essor rapide, la bioéthique a réussi à prendre différentes formes, mais aussi à voir sa principale intention se réduire et devenir hyperspécialisée dans ses aspects théoriques et pratiques. La pensée de Fritz Jahr, résumée dans son impératif bioéthique, nous incite à appréhender à nouveau tant l’intention fondamentale de la bioéthique que le domaine de son objet. C’est pourquoi cette étude se concentrera sur l’impératif bioéthique de Jahr, ses points de départ, sa construction et ses implications, dans un double objectif : explorer la pensée originale de Jahr, puis tenter d’appréhender son message dans le cadre du discours contemporain relatif à la bioéthique, notamment la bioéthique intégrative. Ce dernier point n’a été qu’esquissé, laissant place à un éventuel développement. Enfin, le texte revient sur la Déclaration de Rijeka, document qui représente la tentative d’une transformation conceptuelle et méthodologique de la bioéthique contemporaine dans le contexte de la pensée de Jahr

This paper attempts to philosophically articulate empirical evidence on the positive effects of illness within the wider context of a discussion of the positive aspects of vulnerability. The conventional understanding holds that to be vulnerable is to be open to harms and wrongs; it is to be fragile, defenseless, and of compromised autonomy. In this paper, we challenge the assumption that vulnerability consists of nothing but powerlessness and dependence on others. This paper attempts to: (1) outline the theoretical conceptualisation of the positive aspects of coping with illness, while simultaneously showing how these findings provide empirical support for some classical philosophical ideas; (2) influence a change in the manners in which the ill are usually perceived (as weak, dependent, robbed of a good life) and (3) point to the importance of modernising the prevalent biomedical conception of illness with the subjective dimension of health. Biomedical understanding of illness focuses on the vulnerable experience of the sufferer, suggesting the importance of philosophical additions.

The differences between the image of top athletes in history and those today could meet at the intersection between cyborg theory and sport studies. The reconceptualisation of athletes could at first be viewed as a shift from the “natural” to the “artificial”. Throughout history top athletes have always been considered to be somehow unnatural, and have always been celebrated as heroes who have overcome the boundaries of their natural bodies. Today’s sports events have been attracting more viewers than ever before, and tough competition has been raising the very standards of competition. High attendance sports are already freak shows; whether from the comfort of their homes or from the grandstands, it is difficult for sport supporters to imagine themselves sculpting such a super-muscular body with super-fast reflexes. Old-fashioned blood, sweat and tears are still present somewhere, although they are incorporated into the advanced achievements of the modern techno-culture. A number of the issues raised from this perspective have found room for discussion in the relatively new pluri-perspectival approach to the challenges of the biotechnological era – in bioethics. Bioethics offers a platform for a dialogue on the key questions of today’s world, a dialogue that surpasses disciplinary, expert, historical and cultural positions. However, any such discourse is facing a pluralism of approaches and methodological barriers, and presupposes the existence of adequate theoretical grounds. This paper highlights only some of the problem points that plastically outline the insufficiencies of the existing mono-perspectively guided conceptions in the field of sport. Accordingly, the authoress emphasises only some of the symptoms that point to the disorientedness of everyday life, which is portrayed in sport in a rather peculiar way: the fragility of the ethical positions contained in the concepts of the “spirit of sport” and fair play in facing the developments of science and technology, the objectification of the body, and an increase in the people’s interest in high-risk activities. The authoress views these traits as signs of the need to transcend the until recently prevalent reductionistic and mono-perspectival approaches, which the distinctive bioethical approach can indeed do

La différence entre la représentation d’un sportif de haut niveau, telle qu’elle a pu l’être par le passé et telle qu’elle est aujourd’hui, se précise peut-être le mieux au carrefour des théories du cyborg et du sport. La reconceptualisation de la notion de « sportif » évolue dans le sens du « naturel » vers « l’artificel ». Au cours de l’histoire humaine, les sportifs de haut niveau ont toujours été perçus comme, dans une certaine mesure, « non naturels » et ont été célébrés comme des héros dépassant les limites de leur propre corps. Les événements sportifs actuels attirent plus de spectateurs que jamais, et dans le même temps, la concurrence acharnée relève les niveaux et les critères des compétitions. Les sports attirant des spectateurs en masse sont depuis longtemps des « foires aux monstres ». Qu’ils soient dans les stades ou confortablement assis devant leur petit écran, les spectateurs ont du mal à imaginer avoir un jour eux-mêmes un corps aussi musclé avec des superréflexes. La notion démodée de souffrance à base de sang, de sueur et de larmes est désormais présente comme partie prenante des performances de la technoculture moderne. Nombre de questions qui découlent de cette perspective ont trouvé un terrain de débat dans une relativement nouvelle approche, pluriperspectiviste, des défis de l’époque biotechnologique : la bioéthique. La bioéthique offre une base au dialogue sur les questions essentielles du monde actuel : un dialogue qui surmonte les positions sectorielles, historiques et culturelles. Cependant, un tel discours se trouve confronté au pluralisme des approches comme aux barrières méthodologiques et requiert la création d’un appui théorique adéquat. Cette étude ne mettra en exergue que quelques- uns des points problématiques qui, dans le domaine du sport, mettent en relief les défauts des conceptions monoperspectivistes existantes. Dans ce sens, ne seront soulignés que quelques symptômes de la désorientation de la vie quotidienne apparaissant de manière particulière dans le sport : la fragilité des positions éthiques incombant aux concepts de « l’esprit du sport » et du « fair-play » face au progrès scientifique et technique, l’objectivation du corps, l’intérêt accru pour des activités à risque. Ces caractéristiques sont considérées comme les signes d’un besoin de supplanter les approches réductrices et monoperspectivistes, jusqu’à présent dominantes, que l’approche particulière de la bioéthique a la capacité de surmonter

Der Unterschied zwischen einem Spitzensportler früher und heute tritt an den Berührungspunkten zwischen der Kyborg-Theorie und verschiedenen Sportstudien am deutlichsten zutage. Eine Rekonzeptualisierung des Begriffs ,Sportler’ erweist sich demnach als eine Sinnerweiterung von ,natürlich’ zu ,künstlich’. Im Laufe der Geschichte wurden Spitzensportler stets als irgendwie ,un-natürlich’ empfunden und als Helden gefeiert, die die Beschränkungen ihres natürlichen Körpers überwanden. Sportveranstaltungen ziehen heute mehr Zuschauer in ihren Bann, als dies früher jemals der Fall war, und durch die scharfe Konkurrenz werden auch die Standards und Kriterien von Sportwettkämpfen angehoben. Vor einem Massenpublikum stattfindende Sportveranstaltungen haben sich schon längst zu Freak Shows gewandelt, bei denen den Zuschauern in den Stadien oder vor den Bildschirmen zu Hause unvorstellbar ist, dass sie je selbst einen so muskulösen Körper mit superschnellen Reflexen besitzen könnten. Das alte Schlagwort von „Blut, Schweiß und Tränen” besteht auch weiterhin, wenn auch eingebunden in die zukunftsträchtigen Errungenschaften der modernen Techno-Kultur. Die vielzähligen Fragen, die sich aus einer solchen Perspektive ergeben, haben in einem relativ neuen Zugang zu den Herausforderungen des biotechnologischen Zeitalters ihre Plattform gefunden – in der Bioethik. Die Bioethik bietet ein Diskussionsforum für die wichtigsten uns heute bewegenden Fragen, für einen Dialog, der über disziplin- und fachgebundene, historische und kulturologische Positionen hinausgeht. Ein solcher Diskurs sieht sich jedoch sowohl in den unterschiedlichen Ansätzen als auch in den methodologischen Barrieren mit einem Pluralismus konfrontiert und erfordert als Voraussetzung eine entsprechende theoretische Grundlage. In diesem Artikel werden nur einige Problempunkte hervorgehoben, die sich im Bereich des Sports infolge der Unzulänglichkeiten der bestehenden monoperspektivisch orientierten Konzeptionen auf eine plastische Weise abzeichnen. In diesem Sinne verweist die Verfasserin auf einige wenige Symptome, die auf eigentümliche Weise im Sport zum Vorschein kommen und die Desorientiertheit im Alltag sichtbar machen: Gemeint ist die Fragilität ethischer Positionen, die in den Konzepten von „Sportsgeist” und Fairplay enthalten sind und sich gegen den wissenschaftlich-technischen Fortschritt, die Verobjektierung des Körpers und ein gesteigertes Interesse an risikoreichen Aktivitäten behaupten müssen. In der vorliegenden Arbeit werden die angeführten Merkmale als Zeichen des Bedürfnisses verstanden, die bis vor kurzem noch vorherrschenden, reduktionistischen und monoperspektivischen Ansätze zu überwinden, zumal mithilfe der Bioethik, der diesbezüglich besonders gute Chancen nachgesagt werden

Die Revitalisierung des Gedankens Fritz Jahrs scheint rechtzeitig aufzutreten. Der Bioethik gelang es, im Laufe ihrer temporeichen Entwicklung diverse Formen anzunehmen, nichtsdestotrotz in ihrer Grundintention reduziert sowie in ihren theoriebezogenen und praktischen Aspekten hyperspezialisiert zutage zu treten. Die Idee Fritz Jahrs, summiert in dessen bioethischem Imperativ, gibt uns den Ansporn, sowohl die Grundintention der Bioethik als auch ihr Gegenstandsgebiet von Neuem in Augenschein zu nehmen. Mithin richtet sich diese Arbeit auf Jahrs bioethischen Imperativ, dessen Ansatzpunkte, Konstruktion und Implikationen, mit zweifachem Vorhaben: Jahrs Quellgedanken auszuforschen sowie eine Auslegung seiner Botschaft im Rahmen des zeitgenössischen Diskurses zur Bioethik – speziell zur integrativen Bioethik - zu wagen. Das Letztere wurde lediglich durch Anmerkungen ausgeführt, indem es einen Manövrierraum zum eventuellen Gedankenaufbau offenließ. Abschließend nimmt der Text einen Rückblick auf die Rijekaer Deklaration als ein Dokument, das einen Versuch der konzeptuellen und methodologischen Transformation der gegenwärtigen Bioethik im Kontext von Jahrs Idee darlegt

The differences between the image of top athletes in history and those today could meet at the intersection between cyborg theory and sport studies. The reconceptualisation of athletes could at first be viewed as a shift from the “natural” to the “artificial”. Throughout history top athletes have always been considered to be somehow unnatural, and have always been celebrated as heroes who have overcome the boundaries of their natural bodies. Today’s sports events have been attracting more viewers than ever before, and tough competition has been raising the very standards of competition. High attendance sports are already freak shows; whether from the comfort of their homes or from the grandstands, it is difficult for sport supporters to imagine themselves sculpting such a super-muscular body with super-fast reflexes. Old-fashioned blood, sweat and tears are still present somewhere, although they are incorporated into the advanced achievements of the modern techno-culture. A number of the issues raised from this perspective have found room for discussion in the relatively new pluri-perspectival approach to the challenges of the biotechnological era – in bioethics. Bioethics offers a platform for a dialogue on the key questions of today’s world, a dialogue that surpasses disciplinary, expert, historical and cultural positions. However, any such discourse is facing a pluralism of approaches and methodological barriers, and presupposes the existence of adequate theoretical grounds. This paper highlights only some of the problem points that plastically outline the insufficiencies of the existing mono-perspectively guided conceptions in the field of sport. Accordingly, the authoress emphasises only some of the symptoms that point to the disorientedness of everyday life, which is portrayed in sport in a rather peculiar way: the fragility of the ethical positions contained in the concepts of the “spirit of sport” and fair play in facing the developments of science and technology, the objectification of the body, and an increase in the people’s interest in high-risk activities. The authoress views these traits as signs of the need to transcend the until recently prevalent reductionistic and mono-perspectival approaches, which the distinctive bioethical approach can indeed do

The idea of integrative bioethics undoubtedly represents both an intellectual product of the region of Southeast Europe and a certain novum, most certainly when it comes to the theoretical and practical limits of bioethics, which streams from principles. The conceptual footholds of integrative bioethics are characterized by historical-philosophical connections to an intellectual heritage of most European thinkers. This paper will, thus, focus on three authors: St. Francis of Assisi, Fritz Jahr and Albert Schweitzer. Their intentions can generally be defined as a search for guidelines − non-anthropocentric, non-reciprocal and not simply formal ones − which should underline our everyday actions. The intended overview wishes to provide grounds for a reconstruction of the specific tradition of bioethics thought in Europe. This overview also wishes to emphasize the history of an idea rather than its geographical settings. Nevertheless, the idea of integrative bioethics reveals itself as a solid alternative to the reduced, principle-oriented bioethics that has grown from an effort embedded in the works of North America’s authors.