L’article traite de l’importance éthique de l’acceptation de la transcendance de chaque personne. L’auteur soutient les thèses suivantes : l’anthropologie transcendante est un facteur positif du personnalisme ; la violation de la solidarité est un mal fondamental ; l’anthropologie apophatique est un point de vue réaliste ; nous devons éviter les positions extrêmes concernant l’identité : nihilistes et neutralistes d’une part, leur acceptation non critique et leur ossification d’autre part ; l’approche correcte des identités est le réalisme critique et l’universalisme (...) dialogique ; le principe de l’identité profonde est l’esprit ; l’anthropologie transcendante est un facteur positif de l’attitude solidaire. L’auteur conclut que la position de l’anthropologie transcendante offre un bon contexte pour l’ouverture envers l’autre, pour une attitude relationnelle et solidaire, ainsi que pour les traditions vivantes. De plus, elle offre un bon terrain pour l’échange culturel et intellectuel, pour une tolérance responsable du radicalement autre ainsi que pour le sentiment du besoin d’être exposé à l’influence de l’autre. (shrink)

The article is dealing with the ethical importance of the acceptance of the transcendence of every person. The author argues in favor of the following thesis: Transcendent anthropology is a positive factor of personalism; Violation of solidarity is fundamental evil; Apophatic anthropology is a realistic view; We should avoid the extreme positions regarding identities: nihilist or neutralist at one hand and non-critical acceptance and their ossification at the other. The proper approach to identities is critical realism and dialogic universalism; The (...) principle of deeper identity is spirit; Transcendent anthropology is a positive factor of a solidary attitude. The author concludes that the attitude of transcendent anthropology provides a good background for the openness toward the other, for relational and solidary attitude and for the living traditions. Further, it provides a good ground for cultural and intellectual exchange, for responsible tolerance of the radically other and for the feeling of the need for being exposed to the influence of the other. (shrink)

Članak se bavi etičkim značajem prihvaćanja transcendencije svake osobe. Autor zagovara sljedeće teze: transcendentna antropologija je pozitivan čimbenik personalizma; povreda solidarnosti je fundamentalno zlo; apofatička antropologija je realistički nazor; trebamo izbjegavati ekstremne pozicije po pitanju identiteta: nihilističke ili neutralističke s jedne, te nekritičko prihvaćanje i njihovo okoštavanje s druge strane; ispravan pristup identitetima je kritički realizam i dijaloški univerzalizam; princip dubljeg identiteta je duh; transcendentna antropologija je pozitivan čimbenik solidarnog stava. Autor zaključuje da stav transcendentne antropologije nudi dobru pozadinu za (...) otvorenost prema drugome, za odnosni i solidarni stav, kao i za živuće tradicije. Nadalje, nudi također i dobre temelje za kulturnu i intelektualnu razmjenu, za odgovornu toleranciju radikalno drukčijeg i za osjećaj potrebe za bivanjem izloženim utjecaju drugih. (shrink)

The article deals with the development of the philosophy of France Veber, the pupil of Meinong and a main Slovene philosopher. One of the most important threads of Veber’s philosophy is the consideration of knowledge and factuality, which may be seen as a driving force of its development. Veber’s philosophical development is usually divided into three phases: the object theory phase, the phase when he created his philosophy of a person as a creature at the crossing of the natural and (...) the spiritual world, who as an active, not merely passive subject possesses her own causal powers, and the third phase, when he supplemented his earlier philosophy with the theory of a special side of our experience which he called hitting-upon-reality. It is a direct experience of reality, a special kind of intentionality, which is however fundamentally different from presentational intentionality, which alone is taken into account by object theory or phenomenology. The questions of knowledge and factuality are closely connected in Veber’s philosophy since, pace Veber, knowledge is a kind of, we may say, justified experience the object of which is a factual entity. Hence, if we want to understand what knowledge is, we must face the challenge of comprehending factuality. There are five stages to be noted in the development of his epistemology. The first two belong to his object theory phase, the third to his person phase, the fourth is characterised by his distinguishing and exploring truth and validity with regard to the thought about God, and the basis of the fifth phase lies in his theory of hitting-upon-reality. In Introduction to Philosophy and The System of Philosophy, that is in the year 1921, Veber believed that factuality was a property of the object, which we do present, but we do not present the factuality of this factuality. In 1923, in The Problems of Contemporary Philosophy and in the work Science and Religion, he already rejected such a view. There is something that makes things factual, but that is a complete unknown X. Therefore we cannot even say what kind of an entity this factuality is. Some people would probably demand the following formulation: if X is an ultimate mystery, we should not claim even that it is an entity. In The Problems of Presentation Production Veber claimed that factuality is not a property since this would lead to a regressum ad infinitum. Philosophy related internally correct experience to personal will. In T he Book about God he developed the thesis that factuality depends on the act of God. In The Question of Reality he importantly modified, developed and enriched the thesis that we do not present reality with his theory of immediate experience of factuality. (shrink)

Der Artikel nimmt die ethische Bedeutsamkeit der Transzendenzannahme eines jeglichen Individuums auf. Der Autor ergreift das Wort zugunsten folgender Thesen: Die transzendente Anthropologie ist ein positiver Faktor des Personalismus; die Solidaritätsverletzung bedeutet ein fundamentales Unheil; die apophatische Anthropologie ist ein wirklichkeitsnaher Gesichtspunkt; krasse Standpunkte bezüglich der Identität sind zu meiden: nihilistische bzw. neutralistische einesteils und unkritische Akzeptanz bzw. ihre Verknöcherung andernteils. Die angemessene Herangehensweise an die Identitäten wären der kritische Realismus und dialogische Universalismus; der Grundsatz einer tieferen Identität ist der (...) Geist; die transzendente Anthropologie erweist sich als ein positiver Faktor der solidarischen Einstellung. Der Autor schlussfolgert, der Blickwinkel der transzendenten Anthropologie erwerbe eine feste Grundlage zur Empfänglichkeit gegenüber anderen, zur relationalen und solidarischen Einstellung sowie zu den fortdauernden Traditionen. Des Weiteren sichere er eine gute Basis zum kulturellen und intellektuellen Austausch, zu einer verantwortungsvollen Toleranz des radikal Andersartigen sowie zum Drang nach Ausgesetztheit der äußeren Beeinflussung. (shrink)