Bojan Žalec - Etnički Značaj Antropologije

OriginalPaperUDC141.144:17.026.2141.144:159.923.2

ReceivedFebruary20th,2011

BojanŽalecUniversityofLjubljana,FacultyofTheology,Poljanska4,SI–1000Ljubljana

[email protected]

On Not Knowing Who We Are: The Ethical Importance of Transcendent Anthropology

AbstractThe 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 identi-ties: 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.

Key wordstranscendent(apophatic)anthropology,personalism,nihilism,instrumentalism,solidarity,(cultural)identity

“IrecognizeyoumeansthatIcannotknowyouinthoughtorinflesh.”

LuceIrigaray

Transcendent anthropology is a positive factor of personalism

Inordertomakemyfollowingpapermoreunderstandable,letmeatthebe-ginningshortlyexplain themeaningof the termsnihilism, instrumentalism andpersonalism.Nihilismisaconditionofanindividual,ofagroup,ofaso-ciety,ofcultureinwhichexperientialandintellectualhorizonseverythingislevelled.1Nihilisticsubjectcannothonestlyexperienceonethingorbeingasmorevaluablethantheother.Asnihilismispracticallyimpossible,itusuallytransformsintosomekindofinstrumentalism.Instrumentalismisanattitude

1

Kierkegaard described his age as nihilistic.Hedidn’tusethattermbutthephenomenonofnihilismisdetected.Ourage,claimedKi-erkegaard,istheagethatlevelsallthings(cf.

Kierkegaard, 2009, 84). The context or thebackgroundoftheageissuchthatthingscan-notappearasbetterorworse.

SYNTHESISPHILOSOPHICA51(1/2011)pp.(105–115)

B.Žalec,OnNotKnowingWhoWeAre:TheEthicalImportanceofTranscendent…106

thatdoesn’tregardaparticularpersonasagoal,butatbestjustasamean.Tothecontrary,forapersonalist,everypersonisalwaysthegoal.Themainaimofapersonalististheflourishingofeveryperson.Theessentialmomentofeverytruepersonalismisacceptanceofthetranscendenceofeveryperson.Animportantfactorforahumantoliveasahumanisthatthebackgroundofourlifeispervadedwiththeconsciousnessofthefactthatinprincipleweknowneitherourselvesnortheothers,inotherwords,thatpersonsaretran-scendent.Theyaretranscendentinepistemologicalrespectand,accordingtoreligiousviews,alsometaphysically.Factualacceptanceofthetranscendenceofpersons isan importantcorner stoneofmorallyacceptable treatmentofpersons.Forinstance,itisincompatiblewiththetakingofpositionsofbeingajudge,forhowcanyoujudgeaboutsomebodyifyoudonotknowwhoheorsheis.Thetranscendenceofapersonisfurtheraconditionforaproperdialoguewhichincludesalsocriticism:onlyifwedistinguishbetweenpersonandhisorheracts,deeds,wecanleadacriticaldialoguewithothersforIcansaytotheotherperson:“Whatyouhavedoneitisnotgoodbutthatdoesn’timplythatyouyourself,youassucharebad,thatyourpersonisbad.”Ac-ceptingthetranscendenceofapersonisfurtheranecessaryconditionfortherespectofhumanconscience,ofperson’sspontaneityandcreativity. InherOrigins of TotalitarianismHannahArendtshowedthatintheNaziconcentra-tioncampspersonsweredestroyedatthreelevels:1.legalandpolitical;2.moral,and3.atthelevelofindividualidentity.Themainaimoftotalitariansystemshasbeentotransformthehumannatureandtodestroyspontaneityand creativity of persons, which implies the possibility of persons to startsomethingtotally(a)new,somethingunpredictableandpossiblyuncontrol-lable.Thespontaneityandcreativityhavebeenconsideredbytotalitarianismsasa threat.Theyhavetriedto transformhumannature intobeingswithoutspontaneity,butthatonlyledtosuppressionofpersonsaspersonsandcreationofsocietycharacterizedbylethargy,apathy,loneliness,feelingofpowerless-nessandirresponsibility.Alsotodaywemaysaythatfollowingofone’sownconsciousnessisthebestdefenceagainstmanipulationandinstrumentalism.Therealfreedomisnotexemplifiedinsituationswhereeverythingisallowedbut,rather,itisexemplifiedbypersonswhoarereallycapabletofollowwhattheyconsiderbestaccordingtotheirconscienceandtheirreason.Or,toputitinotherwords,inthecircumstancesinwhichtheirdignityisrespectedbyothersandbythemselves.Instrumentalistsalwaystendtowardtwogoals:1)eliminationoftranscend-ence(oftheperson);2)levellingandidentifyingotherwisedifferentbeings.So they do not respect individuality, difference, the other as the other.Anexampleofsuchalevellingisprovidedbysomeconsiderationsofwomen.Womenandmenaredifferentinallpossibleaspects:fromphysiologicaltotheirsubjectivity.Therealacceptanceofwomendoesnotconsistinakindofneutralviewwhichabstracts all the importantdifferencesbetweenmenandwomenbut rather instressingof thosedifferences,whichalso impliesunavoidabletranscendencebetweenmaleandfemalesubjectivity.Onlyac-ceptanceofthattranscendencecanenablerealempathy,dialogue,solidarityandmutualenrichmentbetweenmenandwomen.2

Solidarity–participationinthelifeoftheother–canhoweveronlybepartial.Thebeliefthatwecanreachtotalparticipationisdangerousanddestroysap-proachingofotherastheother,eliminationoftreatingherorhimasaperson,andprovidescontextforinstrumentalizationandmanipulation.Acceptingofthe transcendenceofothers andofmyownperson is anecessarybulwark



againstinstrumentalismandmanipulation.Theconsciousnessabouttheim-portanceofacceptingandrespectingthetranscendenceofpersonsmustleadalso scientists, physicians, lawyers, teachers, clerics, managers and otherswhodealwithhumanbeingsintheirworkandinlifeingeneral,forinstance(lastbutnotleast)parents.Therespectofthetranscendenceofapersonrep-resentstheethicallimitoftheircompetence.Auniversallyapplicableforgivenessispossibleonlyinthehorizonoftran-scendentviewonpersons.Tomakeforgivenesspossible, it isnecessary todistinguishbetweenpersons,betweenapersonatonehandandbyanysetofhisorheracts,personaltraits,habits,vicesetc.,thatmightexhaustinglydescribeher,totalizeorrationalizeher,towhich(s)hemightbepossiblyre-duced, inshort toanysetsofhisorherelements,attributes,moments thatmightrenouncehisorhertranscendenceattheother.Foruniversalforgive-ness(suchthatgiveschancetoanywrongdoer,nomatterhowbadhisorherwrongsmightbe)tobepossibleweshouldconsidertheonewhocommittedsomethingbadasamoralagentwhohasdonesomethingwrongbutat thesametimealsoasapersonwhocannotbeexhaustedbyanydescriptionorinterpretation.Weshould“hate”person’swrongsorbadcircumstancesorthecontextthatcontributedtoherbaddeeds,butneverapersonassuch.How-ever,thecultureofforgivenessisacrucialfactorinordertocultivatesolidar-ity(inclusion),peace,non-violenceetc.(Cf.Govier,2002)Therecognitionoftheotherastheotherimpliestherecognitionthat(s)heistranscendenttome.AsLuceIrigarayhasputit:

“IrecognizeyoumeansthatIcannotknowyouinthoughtorinflesh.Thepowerofanegativeremainsbetweenus.Irecognizeyougohandinhandwith:youareirreducibletome,justasIamtoyou.Wemaynotbesubstitutedforoneanother.Youaretranscendenttome,inaccessi-bleinaway,notonlyasonticbeingbutalsoasontologicalbeing(whichentails,inmyview,fidelitytoliferatherthansubmissiontodeath.)Betweenusatranscendencealwayssubsists,notasanabstractionoraconstruct,afabricationofthesametogrounditsoriginortomeasureitsdevelopment,butastheresistanceofaconcreteandideationalreality:Iwillneverbeyou,eitherinbodyorinthought.Recognizingyoumeansorimpliesrespectingyouasother,acceptingthatIstopbeforeyouasotherbeforesomethinginsurmountable,amystery,afreedomthatwillneverbemine,asubjec-tivitythatwillneverbemine,aminethatwillneverbemine.”(Irigaray,2004,8)

Violation of solidarity is a fundamental evil

Allthecultural,spiritual,religiousandphilosophicalwisdomofthepast,thefindingsofpsychoanalysisandthegrowingevidenceprovidedby(modern)science(neurology,cognitivescience,psycho-historyofcrimes)pointtotheonesinglepoint:themedia,foundationandoriginofhealthypersonsandso-ciety,ofgoodlifeandhappiness,ofpeaceandstability,issolidarity.Toleranceandthecultureappropriateforamodernpluralisticandvaluehet-erogeneoussocietyareseriouslyendangeredbyviolence.Themeasureofagoodsocietyisthepresenceofviolenceinit.FollowingGandhiandSen,wemaysaythat thereductionofviolenceasmuchaspossible isareasonablevaluethateveryhealthysocietyshouldstrivefor(Sen,1999).Accordingly,

2

AccordingtoIrigaraythedifferencebetweenmen’s andwomen’s subjectivity is themostimportantbecauseitisthemostuniversalandmost basic (cf. Irigaray, 2010, 5–6). Hence

thecultivationofgenderneutralismruinsthebasis itself of any proper recognition of theother, (intellectual) solidarityand truecoex-istence.



weshouldaskourselvesaboutthenatureofthesocietythathindersorstimu-latesviolenceandhenceaboutthecriteriaforagoodsociety.Wethinkthefollowingcharacteristicsarecrucial:personalism,inclusionandsolidarity.Theoppositeofinclusionismarginalization.Inagoodsocietynobodyshouldbemarginalized,notpolitically,economicallyoreducationally(Juhant,2008:165–176).Thoseshouldbetheidealsofagoodsociety.Ameasureoftheirre-alizationisameasureofitsgoodness.Marginalizationcausesviolencewhichas a consequence threatens stability and democracy in a society. Inclusionmeanssolidarity,material, intellectualandother, thatmeansoursharingofintellectual lifeandofothergoods insociety,participation in thecommongoodofasociety.Theextremecaseofexclusionis,forinstance,aviolationofhumanrights(likeinconcentrationcamps)andforthatreasonHollenbach(2003)understandshumanrightsasaninstitutionalizationofhumansolidar-ity.Apersonalistsocietyisasocietywherethedignityofhumanbeingsaspersonsisrespected.Thedevelopmentofthecapabilitiesofpersonstofreelyusetheirreason(thecapacitytoknow)andtheirconscienceissupportedandcultivatedinpersonalistsocieties.Our thesis is thatagoodsociety, in thesenseofhinderingviolencein thatsociety,isasocietyofpersonalistsolidarity.Thereasonsforitcanbefoundatseverallevels:fromneurologicalthroughpsychoanalyticaltopsycho-his-toryofcrime.Neurologicalevidence isprovidedbymoderncognitivesci-ence.JoachimBauerreportsaboutitinhisbookPrinciple of Humanity: Why Humans are Cooperative by Their Nature (Bauer, 2006). He for instancereportsaboutaspecialsubstancecalleddopaminewhichourbodysecreteswhenweareingoodrelationswithotherbeings,whenweareincludedinahumangroupandsimilar.Thesecretionofdopaminebringsgoodmoodanditisakindofnaturaldrugweareaddictedto.Inthecaseofbeingexcluded,weexperiencesomesortofabstinentcrisisanditispossibletosearchforadopamine surrogate in inappropriate ways, for instance by using syntheticdrugs,goingtoaprostituteetc.Thissupportstheflourishingofcriminalbusi-nesswhichinturnbringsviolenceintosocietyandgenerallyendangersthewholeofsociety.MargotSunderlandinherbookThe Science of Parenting(2008)directsustotheimportanceofaproperlovingrelationshipwithourchildren in order to avoid the very damaging bio-chemical state of baby’sbrainwhichcanbepermanent.Thesystemsofvitalimportance,connectedwiththechemicalsubstancesthathaveeffectsonemotions,likeopioids,nor-adrenaline,dopamineandserotonin–thesesystemsarestilldevelopinginun-developedbrains–mightbeseriouslydamagedandmightcauseachemicalnon-equilibriuminbrain.Sunderland,forexample,claimsthatalowlevelofserotoninisoneofthekeyfactorsofdepressionandalsoofviolentbehaviour(op. cit.,43).Serotonin,achemicalsubstanceinbrainsisaveryimportantfactor for social and emotional intelligence.An optimal level of serotoninmightstabilizeone’smood,diminishaggressivenessandforthatreasonithasan important role in the strengtheningofgood relations.Researchershaveshownthatmonkeysthatwereveryrespectedintheirsocietyandatthetopofthesocialhierarchyhadtheoptimallevelofserotonin.Thelevelofserotoninisstronglyinfluencedbyhumanrelations,eitherpositivelyornegatively.Re-searchershaveproventhatstressinearlylifemightinfluenceinadamagingwaythesystemofserotonininthedevelopingbrainofalittlechild.Contrarytothat,thelovingmomentsyousharewithyourchildpositivelyinfluencethelevelofserotoninintheventromedialcortex.Ifachildsharesmanybeautifulmomentswithyou,hewillgetusedtotheoptimallevelofserotonininhisbrainandthatthenwillbecomeapartofhistruepersonality.Alowlevelof



serotonininanimalsandhumansisconnectedwiththeirimpulsivebehaviour.Serotonin,achemicalsubstancewhichequilibratesone’smood,inthatcasecannotcalmtheemotionalreactionsofamanoranimaldown.Whensuchapersonoranimalgetsangry,wearenotjustdealingwithamildformofirrita-tionorreluctancebutwithamad,horriblefury.Itiswellknownthatmonkeyswithalowlevelofserotoninareimpulsiveandaggressive(op. cit.,223).Thatshouldbeenoughabout theneurological reasons.We think themessage isclearenough.Thefindingsofpsychoanalysispointinthesamedirection.Thephenomenathatpsychoanalysisdescribesasidentificationwiththeaggressor,theprotec-tivemechanismofprojectionandprojectiveidentification,andtheprotectivemechanismofsplitting(seeBohak,2008,35–48)shouldbementionedhere.In the firstcase,collectives thatare themselvesvictimsofviolenceconse-quentiallycarryoutsimilarviolenceonothercollectives.Withthelastphe-nomenon,wedealwithpeoplewhoseparentsdidnotrespondtotheirneedsandofferedthemtheirattentiveness,careandloveintheirchildhood.Suchanattitudecausesthedevelopmentofanegativeself-imageintheirchildren.Thecomplexinwhichthenegativeself-imageisinterwovenwithatwofoldrelationshipwiththeparents(suchpeopleusuallyspeakaboutakind-hearteddaddyandmummyononehandbut,ontheother,theyperceivethemasmon-sters,theyhatethem)resultsinviolencetowardsotherpeople.Psychothera-pistsarefamiliarwiththefactthatviolentpatternsofbehaviouraretransmit-tedfromonegenerationtoanother(manyvictimsofviolenceintheir laterlife themselves search for a violent environment) if proper treatment doesnotbreakthecircleoftransmission.Thelastbutnottheleast,theaggressionsomeonedirectstowardshimselfshouldalsobeconsidered,namelysuicide.AntoonA.Leenaars(2005)inhisessayabouttraumaandsuicideamongabo-riginesattheNorthPoleandinAustraliahypothesizesthatasimilarphenom-enonasinAustraliaandattheNorthPolealsotookplaceinLithuaniaundertheSovietoccupation.Thecharacteristicofaboriginalsocietiesisthatbeforethecolonialoccupationthesuiciderateamongthepopulationwasnothigh.ThesameistrueofLithuania.Today,allthesesocietiesareburdenedbysui-cidesasiftherewasanepidemic.Inthecaseofaboriginalsocietiestherateofsuicide is five timeshigher thanamong thewhitepopulation.CanadianresearchersthinkthatthecausesofsuchsuicidesamongInuitsarepoverty,divorce,andlossofchildren,accessibilityoffirearms,alcoholism,personaland family health problems, past sexual and bodily abuses. But Leenaarsthinksthosephenomenaaretheeffectsofgenocide(Dežman,2008,372andnext).If we add to the above evidence the numerous examples showing, almostasarule,thatviolentpersonsandcollectiveswerethemselvessubjectedtoviolence,wemayconcludethatthefundamentalsourceofviolenceinaso-ciety is the violation of personalist solidarity ethics (which for Christiansmightalsosimplybecalledtheethicsoflove–inthesenseoflat.caritas,gr.agape).Theoppositeof solidarity is exclusion.Arendtnamed theNaziconcentra-tion camps as places of the radical evil.They were places of extreme ex-clusionintendedtodestroyanysolidarity,whereeverythingwasdirectedtoonemaingoal–thetortureofpeople.Theproperaimofhumanrightsistopreventsuchexclusionandinstrumentalizationofpersons.Hencetheymayberightlycharacterizedastheinstitutionalizationofhumansolidarity(Hol-lenbach,2003).



Apophatic anthropology is a realistic view

Theaimofthischapteristoconvincethereaderthattheapophaticanthropol-ogyisnotonlyawishoradesirableethicalviewbutalsotheviewthatbestsuitsthefacts.Wecanexpressalotofidentificationsandsay:thisisme–male,Slovene,father,son,husband,brother,Catholic,philosopher…Butallthoseareinasenseobservablethingsandalsoaccidental.Itispossibleformetoremainthesamemeandceasetobehusband,Catholic…MyI,mydeepself,myidentityismysteriousandconnectedtomydeedsandactions:whatisclearinthefirstplaceiswhatIhavedone,whatmyattitudesare,butmuchlesscleariswhyIhavedoneparticularthings,andwhyIcultivatetheattitudesthatIdo.Inthatsensewedonotknowtotallywhoweareindepth,wedonotknowthesourceofourdeedsandattitudes.3Thisdeeperselfmoreorlessstronglybearsinflu-enceuponourattitudesandactions.Thoughtcanbeuncertain,actionnot:itiswhatitis.Forinstance,evenifthereisnotheoreticcertaintyaboutChristianityImayliveandact(intheChristianway)andalwayscannotanswerwhyIactandliveasIdo.Mywayoflivingoriginates in thestratumofmypersonality that isnot (only)cognitiveandevenlesstheoretical,thoughcognitionandtheorymayaffectit.Justbecause there isnocertainty,wearebelievers.Christian faith is therewherethereisnocertaintyandstillweliveandactintheChristianway.Toclosereflectionitisinasenseeasyandun-ascetical.To“torture”oneselfwithreflection,tobeawareofuncertaintyandstillliveintheChristianwayisac-tuallyaproofofdeepfaith.4ItmeansreallytosubjectoneselftothedelightofbeingChristian.ItiseasiertobeChristianifyouarenotawareofincom-prehensibilityofthefoundationorjustifiabilityofChristianity.InthatsenseChristianityisapracticaldoctrine,fortheresolutionofChristianknotsmaybeonlypractical.IdecidebymyselfforChristianity;thisisaleapoffaithorbettersaidaconstantleapinginfaithbecausethereisnocertainty.Wittgen-steinwasrightinasense:alltruthsofChristianitymaybeincertainsensefalse,andthatstillmaynotunderminemyChristianity,thatmeansunderminemythinking,myfeeling,myexperiencing,myacting,inshortmylivingintheChristianway(cf.Wittgenstein,1994).5My“torture”andasceticismasChristianconsistalsoinexposingmyselftocriticalreflectionortophiloso-phythatmightbedestabilizing.WhenIamdefeatingorovercomingthefireofthatdestabilizationandIstillremainorevenbecomeaChristian,IaminasenseprovidingtheanchoringpointfortheinterpretationthattheHolySpiritispresent inme.Thus it isnot true thata faithfulChristiandoesnotneedphilosophy.Onthecontrary:preciselyaChristianneedsphilosophy,forlifeofhisspiritualasceticism,whileontheotherhand,forinstanceforhedonisticnaturalist,“self-torturing”withphilosophyandunderminingofthecertaintymaybereallydoesnotmakesense.Perhapswecannotsaythatphilosophyisthebestpath toChristianity,butnon-fundamentalistopennessofmindthatadequatelyrecognizesthepowerorevenvalueofchallengingideascertainlyis.Andtolivephilosophicallymeanstoliveinsuchopenness,wemayevensayvulnerability.For that reason, for aChristian it isnotonlyphilosophywhichstabilizes,whichisfortifying,butalsophilosophywhichundermines.Inthefireoftheopposingviewsordoctrines,wetest,fortifyandoftenenrichourownChristianity.Christianattitudeisex-centric.6

Reflectionandphilosophyhavesimilarvaluealsoforotherviews,identities,horizons,attitudesetc.insofartheyareproperanddeep,evenfortheatheistic



one: it is a constant test ofgenuine andproper liberalism, atheismetc., inshort,ofeverytrueidentity.

Cultural identities, dialogical universalism and critical realism

UntilnowIhavestressedmainlysomehowmoreindividualsidesoftheper-sonalistattitude:acceptingofthetranscendenceofeveryperson,respectingof personal dignity including the voice of conscience and similar.Yet thisshouldnotmisleadonetothinkthatIregardtheculturalidentityortradition(let’scalltheiraspectsthatarerelevantforourdiscussionmoralidentity)asunimportant.Tothecontrary.Forinstance,Ithinkthattherespectforlocalculturesis–inasense–acounterpart(atthecollectiveorculturallevel)ofconscienceattheindividuallevelandassuchabulwarkagainstcommercialandinstrumentalist(global)societyandagainstmanipulation.Further,Ithinkthatwe are infusedwith (cultural) identities,whetherwe recognize this ornot.So every total refusal of identitieswould actuallymean the refusal ofsomeconcretepersons.Therearemanyothergoodreasonsforattachmenttothisorother(cultural)identity.Idonothavespacetodealwiththeminthispaper,butIlistedandconsideredtheminsomeofmineothertexts(cf.Žalec,2006,38–47).Yet,theaboveoutlinedtranscendentalandsolidarypersonalismshouldserveasabasisalsoforourattitudetoward(cultural)identities:oursandofothers.Inthelightofitweshoulddecidewhatisgoodandwhatisbadintraditions,whatweshouldfosterandcultivateandwhatweshoulddiscardinthem.Sothereisakindofuniversalisminthispersonaliststance,butthisunivers-alismisdialogical,solidaryandproperlytolerant.Itisnotcommanding,au-thoritative,imperious,excluding,imperialistic,domineeringandneutralist.Itisakindofcosmopolitanismifnoblecosmopolitanismincludeseffortsindi-rectionofempathy,lookingthroughtheeyesoftheothers,orinotherwords,anexperientialandintellectualsolidarity.Personalismshouldalsoserveasacriterionfor thequestionsaboutpropermorality,properreligionandaboutdeviationfromthem.Areliablesignofdeviationisviolationofpersonalism.

3

Itisnotirrelevantforourdiscussiontopointout also to the Zygmunt Bauman’s view onidentity(intheworldofliquidmodernity)(cf.Bauman, 2008). Strahovnik (2010, 96) haspresenteditasfollows:“Inliquidmodernityidentityisflexibleandinastateofpermanenttransformation, inwhichoneperpetually re-defines oneself through becoming someoneotherthanonehasbeensofar.”

4

“On the other hand, if such faith does notcontinuallyexposeitselftothepossibilityofunfaith,itisnotfaithbutaconvenience.Itbe-comesanagreementwithoneselftoadhereinthefuturetoadoctrineassomethingthathassomehowbeenhandeddown.Thisisneitherhavingfaithnorquestioning,butindifference–-whichcanthen,perhapsevenwithkeenin-terest,busyitselfwitheverything,withfaithas well as with questioning.” (Heidegger,2000,8)

5

In1947Wittgensteinwrotethatreligiousfaithmightbeatmostsomethinglikeapassionatedecisionforaparticularsystemofreference(inGermanoriginalheusedtheworddas Be-zugssystem).Hence,thoughfaithisafaith,itisakindoflifeorakindofjudgingthelife(cf.Wittgenstein,1994).

6

On theChristianity as an ex-centric attitudein the context of social ethics and politicaltheory, situation of religion in modern soci-ety,discussionabout theproper roleof reli-giousargumentsinpoliticaldiscourse,aboutex-centricperspectiveasavoidingrelativismand fundamentalism, as mediating betweenparticularityanduniversality,SittlichkeitandMoralität,religionandpolitics,faithandrea-son,seeLaux,2007.



JustthinkaboutSpanishinquisition,IslampracticedunderTalibanregimes,Nazism,communistregimesorideologicalusesofidealofeconomicpros-perity.The best attitude towards identities might be called – using epistemologi-cal terms– critical realism.Neither the attitude that takes the identities asuntouchableoroverestimatestheirimportanceorsuperiority,northestancethatdiminishes their importanceorevenconsiders themas something thatshouldbedestroyedoreliminatedbecausetheyareonlyusedforsomebadaims,toinstrumentalizepeople’sattachments,affections,emotionsforcertaingoals(political,economical…)areproper.Neitherasubordinationofsomeindividualconcretepersonstosome(collective)identitynorthe“nihilistic”attitudetoidentity,areacceptable.Collectiveormoralidentitiesareneces-sary for the flourishingofpersons, theyhave their irreplaceablevalue thatshouldberespectedyettheyshouldbealsodevelopedandtransformed.Thegoodandacceptableshouldbeacceptedandsomeotherelementsshouldbediscardedormodified.Weshouldcultivateanddevelopmoraltraditionsthatarethemediaoftran-scendentpersonalists.Suchpersonsarecapableofdevelopingthevirtuesnec-essaryinthemodernworld:empathy,dialogueanduniversal(non-excluding)solidarity.Weshouldnotforgetalsothehospitality.Thetruehospitalitycon-sistsofacceptingoftheotherastheother,ofastranger.Onlyapersonwiththetranscendentattitudetowardherself,capableofrecognizingstrangerandunknowninherself,iscapableofhospitalitytowardastrangerinsomeotherpersons.7

Spirit as a principle of identity; transcendent anthropology as a positive factor of a solidary attitude

Nihilistand instrumentalistviewsoftengohand inhandwith thenegativestanceagainst(deeporcultural) identities.Thoseidentitiesareactuallythesourceofmeaninganddeontology. In thenihilist and instrumentalistviewany deontological concept and also the concept of (deeper) meaning aremeaningless.Atbest in those twokindsofhorizons theycanbe treatedasinstruments or means for something else and they should be unmasked assuchor– insomecases–used.Thiscansoundincrediblebecauseexactlymanyinstrumentalistviewshavestronglystressedtheidentity,forinstanceracial(Nazism),class(communism)…Accordingtomyview,thoseinstru-mentalismsonlyapparentlyvaluedtheproclaimedidentitybutactuallytheywereidentitynihilists.Toputitverydirectly,deeperidentityisamatterofspirit.8Torecognizehumanbeingsasspiritualcreaturesalreadyimpliesthatweconsiderthemastranscendentcreatures.Andtotreattranscendentcrea-turesaspuremeansisincoherentposition.Whathappenedincasesofcom-munismorNazismwasthattheyde factoeliminatedthespiritualdimensionanddegradedidentitiestosomeeconomicaloreven(quasi)biologicallevel.Inanycase,whathappenedwasthenaturalizationofidentitieswhatde factomeanstheeliminationofidentities.Deeperidentityissomethingthatcanbeascribedonlytospiritualbeings.Theprincipleofsuchidentityisspirit.Inanon-transcendenthorizonwemayrecognizethatpeopleareattachedtoiden-titiesbutthatfactalonedoesnotsuggestthatweshouldattachanyintrinsicvaluetothem.Atbestwerespectthemasvaluesbecausepeopleareattachedtothem;werespectpeople’sattachmentsassuchnomatterwhattheirqualityororigin.Butsuchafoundationisoftennotasufficientbackgroundforthe



respectingofidentitiesbecauseitdoesnotprovidetheunderstandingofwhytheyareimportant.Sode factothedoorisopenfornotacceptingorrespectingpeople’sidentities,ofwhattheyreallydeeplyare,and–inconsequence–fortheattitudethatdoesnotaccepttheselfortheother,thatisnottrulysolidary.Inthatsensethetranscendentattitudetowardhumanbeingsisapositivefac-torforcultivationoftheattitudethattrulyacceptstheintegralperson(mineorother)andthatistrulysolidary.

Conclusion

Theattitudeoftranscendentanthropologyprovidesagoodbackgroundfortheopenness towardtheother, forrelationalandsolidaryattitude,andforthelivingtraditions,orwithotherwords,againstthefossilizationoftradi-tionsorculturalidentities.Further,itprovidesagoodgroundforculturalandintellectual exchange, for responsible tolerance of the radically other andforthefeelingoftheneedforbeingexposedtotheinfluenceoftheother.Transcendentpersonalismprovidesgoodreasonstotoleratemanyotheranddifferentviews.Itisastancethatstimulatessearchingandexperimentation,yetwithinthelimitsthatpreventusfromfallingindisastrousexperimentsknownfromthehistory,groundedexactlyontheviolationofpersonalism.It implies that individualsandsocieties take themselvesasaconstantandunfinishedtaskandassubjectsofanarrativewhichoriginatesandendsintranscendence.

References

Arendt,H.(1962)Origins of Totalitarianism.London:G.Allen&Unwin.

Bauer,J.(2006)Prinzip Menschlichkeit: Warum wir von Natur aus kooperieren.Hamburg:HoffmanundCampe.

Berdyaev,N. (1962)Spirit and Reality.Trans.byG.Reavey.SanFrancisco:SemantronPress.

Bauman,Z. (2008) The Art of Life.Cambridge:PolityPress.

Bohak,J.(2008)“Religijainnasilje–psihoanalitskipristop”.InZnamenja,no.3–4,pp.35–48.

Dežman,J.(2008)»Tranzicijskapravičnost«.InPoročilo Komisije Republike Slovenije za reševanje vprašanj prikritih grobišč 2005–2008.Ljubljana:Družina,pp.251–404.

Govier,T.(2002)Forgiveness and Revenge.London–NewYork:Routledge.

Heidegger,M.(2000)Introduction to Metaphysics.Trans.byGregoryFriedandRichardPolt.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress.

Hollenbach,D.,S.J.(2003/2002/)The Common Good & Christian Ethics.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Irigaray,L.(2004)Key Writings.London–NewYork:Continuum.

Irigaray,L.(2010)“EthicalGesturestowardtheOther”.InPoligrafi,vol.15,no.57,pp.3–23.

7

Cf.Kristeva,1991.

8

FortheunderstandingofthewordspiritasIuse ithereseeBerdyaev,1962.For the the-

sis that the principle of the nation is spiritand about relation between nationalism andChristianity see Veber, 1927 and 1938, andŽalec,2002.



Juhant, J. (2008) Im Feuer der europäischen Ideenzüge: Slowenien, (Europa2020,Bd.24).Wien–Zürich–Berlin:Münster–LitVerlag.

Kierkegaard,S.(2009)Two Ages:The Age of Revolution and the Present Age.Trans.byHowardV.HongandEdnaH.Hong.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Kristeva,J.(1991)Strangers to Ourselves. Trans.byLeonS.Roudiez.NewYork:Colum-biaUniversityPress.

Laux,B.(2007)Excentrische Sozialethik. Zur Präsenz und Wirksamkeit christlichen Gla-ubens in der modernen Gesellschaft.Berlin:LitVerlag.

Leenaars,A.A.(2005)“TraumaandSuicideamongAboriginalPeople:StoriesfromtheArcticandAustralia(withParticularReferencetotheSituationinLithuania)”.InD.Gai-liené(ed.),The Psychology of Extreme Traumatisation: The Aftermath of Political Repres-sion.Vilnius:GenocideandResistanceResearchCentreinLithuania.

Sen,A. (1999) “Global Justice: Beyond International Equity”. In I. Kaul, I. Grunberg,M.A.Stern(eds.),Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the 21st Century.Oxford–NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.116–125.

Strahovnik,V. (2010)“TheArtofLife:KekesandBaumanonAttainingtheGoodLife”.InJ.Juhant&B.Žalec(eds.)Art of Life: Origins, Foundations and Perspectives.Berlin:LitVerlag,pp.91–98.

Sunderland, M. (2008) Znanost o vzgoji. Slov. trans. by S. Jesenovec Petrović andB.PetrovićJesenovec(orig.The Science of Parenting,London:DorlingKindersley,2006).Radovljica:Didakta.

Veber,F.(1927)Idejni temelji slovanskega agrarizma.Ljubljana:Kmetijskatiskovnaza-druga.

Veber,F.(1938)Nacionalizem in krščanstvo.Ljubljana:I.Peršuh.

Wittgenstein,L.(1994/1984/)Vermischte Bemerkungen,Werkausgabe,Band8.FrankfurtamMain:Suhrkamp.

Žalec,B.(2002)Spisi o Vebru.Ljubljana:Študentskazaložba.

Žalec,B.(2006)“GoodLifeandMorality:ForVirtuousParticularism,againstGenerali-sm”.InJ.Juhant&B.Žalec(eds.),Person and Good: Man and His Ethics in the Postmo-dern World,Berlin:LitVerlag,pp.37–64.

BojanŽalec

O nepoznavanju samoga sebe: etičkiznačajtranscendentneantropologije

SažetakČlanak se bavi etičkim značajem prihvaćanja transcendencije svake osobe. Autor zagovara slje-deće teze: transcendentna antropologija je pozitivan čimbenik personalizma; povreda solidar-nosti je fundamentalno zlo; apofatička antropologija je realistički nazor; trebamo izbjegavati ekstremne pozicije po pitanju identiteta: nihilističke ili neutralističke s jedne, te nekritičko pri-hvaćanje i njihovo okoštavanje s druge strane; ispravan pristup identitetima je kritički realizam i dijaloški univerzalizam; princip dubljeg identiteta je duh; transcendentna antropologija je po-zitivan 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 tradi-cije. 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.

Ključneriječitranscendentna (apofatička) antropologija, personalizam, nihilizam, instrumentalizam, solidarnost,(kulturni)identitet



BojanŽalec

Zur Unkenntnis von sich selbst: Ethischer Belang der transzendenten Anthropologie

ZusammenfassungDer Artikel nimmt die ethische Bedeutsamkeit der Transzendenzannahme eines jeglichen Indivi-duums auf. Der Autor ergreift das Wort zugunsten folgender Thesen: Die transzendente Anthro-pologie ist ein positiver Faktor des Personalismus; die Solidaritätsverletzung bedeutet ein fun-damentales 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 Univer-salismus; 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 Empfänglich-keit gegenüber anderen, zur relationalen und solidarischen Einstellung sowie zu den fortdau-ernden 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.

Schlüsselwörtertranszendente(apophatische)Anthropologie,Personalismus,Nihilismus,Instrumentalismus,Solida-rität,(kulturelle)Identität

BojanŽalec

De la méconnaissance de soi-même : l’importance éthique de l’anthropologie transcendante

RésuméL’article traite de l’importance éthique de l’acceptation de la transcendance de chaque per-sonne. 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 ossifica-tion 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 relation-nelle 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.

Mots-clésanthropologie transcendante (apophatique), personnalisme, nihilisme, instrumentalisme, solidarité,identité(culturelle)

Documents

Bojan Žalec - Etnički Značaj Antropologije