Cjeloviti sustav samoizljeenja – Taoistike unutranje vjebeDr. Dr. Stephen T. Chang – Cjeloviti sustav samoizljecenja – Taoistike Unutranje. Knjiga kreće na put iz Knjižnice Medveščak, Zagreb, Hrvatska = This book begins it’s journey form Medvescak Public Library, Zagreb, Croatia. Description: Cjeloviti sustav samoizlječenja – Taoističke unutrašnje vježbe Dr. Stephen T. Chang. View More. Cjeloviti sustav samoizlječenja – Taoističke.

Author: Zumi Mikar
Country: Mauritius
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Environment
Published (Last): 14 June 2011
Pages: 158
PDF File Size: 19.13 Mb
ePub File Size: 17.31 Mb
ISBN: 893-3-89540-515-3
Downloads: 34125
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Tojind

Document publishing platform How it works. Enter Remember Me Request new password? Log in using OpenID. Etika i sport Rijeka, 7.

Sports and the Ethical Challenges They Pose Damir Erceg, Ivan Fattorini In fact, do we want to win at all? All, what you want the people do to you, the same do to them Matthews 7: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law, – this basically means the same.

The motive, disregarding such a criterion, could just be blatant egotism, a so called contract on reciprocity: Do nothing to me, so that, in return, I will do nothing to you Schopenhauer hints to that in his ‘Grundlage der Moral’. If we are aware that love is the fulfillment of the moral law Romans We know the motive.

But we do not yet know the concrete content of the moral law, we don’t know what to do or not to do specifically. Here, Schopenhauer, serves as a helping hand: He calls as the best, the most concrete specification of the moral act the sentence: Neminem laede, imo omnes, quantum potes juva! Don’t hurt anyone, but help everyone, as far as you possibly can! More than two millennia before Schopenhauer, the 5th Commandmenrt already has brought such an insight, and in fact in a broader perspective than benefit or harm, namely under the perspective of sanctity of life and life’s manifestations.

We know from Jesus, that the 5th Commandment does not only prohibit killing, but all bad deeds against others, even the bad word, even the bad thought. He not only forbids the malicious or careless destruction of life, but everything as well which, in one way or the other, may influence life in a hampering or troubling way.

Luther in his Catechism has made it clear that the 5th commandment has to be understood not only in a negative, but as well in a positive way. Routinely we do not consider that each person has moral duties towards oneself as well, and that those duties are of immense importance. Christian religion expressively mentions those moral duties of everyone towards oneself. That, basically, applies to the 5th commandment as well: In a later consequence, however, it means: Preservation of life — and one’s own life not excluded — is a duty.

And destruction and harm — again, including one’s own life — is a moral sin. You shall keep God’s temple sacred and not destroy it. By not taking one’s own life, by not shortening it, by not harm or endangering it, by not weakening one’s own health by unchastity, excesses in eating and drinking, heavy anger, frivolous foolhardiness and daredevilry, etc.

Particularly saamoizljeenja is the protection of sexual virtue and the cjeolviti of abuse of alcoholic drinks. But not only is it a duty to oneself to not fornicate, but also the avoidance of everything, which might lead to unchastity: Are the duties towards one’s own life not in conflict with duties towards the neighbor? That can be shown in regard to the already mentioned issues in sakoizljeenja and alcohol: Venereal diseases threaten as well.

Weakness and disease cause the victim to be more and more a burden to the community, harming everyone. Those, who are dependent on consuming alcohol, may eventually expose themselves to severest physical and spiritual dangers.


If one protects oneself in this regard against harm, one does, at the same time, good to one’s neighbor, actually to one’s entire country.

salaten tüncina adetliyken okunur mu Finnish Network of Alvar Aalto Cities goes international

The Bioethical Imperative ‘Thou shalt not kill’ admonishes the 5th Commandment. Now, the term killing always means killing something which is alive. Living entities, however, are not only humans, but animals and plants as well. Because the 5th commandment does not expressively prohibit the killings of humans exclusively, should it not be applied towards animals and plants analogously? But are animals and plants so close to us that we must recognize and treat them actually as our neighbors? Such an equality in treatment today is not reserved, as already mentioned, for humans, as similar methods are applied in the field of animals, and – as there is a comparative anatomical-zootomic research – similarly very interesting comparisons are made between human soul and animal soul3.

Yes, even the beginnings of plant psychology are recognizable — the most well-known among them are G. Fechner4 in the past, DE.

Wagner6 at present — thus modern psychology includes all living beings in its research. Given this, it is only consequent, that E.

myydään palju käytetty Regulator R 2 ICE set III (reg.+ octo + spg + depth + compass)

Eisler7, in summarizing, speaks of a Bio-Psychik. From Bio-Psychik, there is only a small step to Bio-Ethik, i. In fact, bioethics is not a samoizljeebja of today. Montaigne8 already grants – as the only early representative 2 Alcohol is ‘a mean enemy of our race’, cf.

Sommer, Tierpsychologie, Leipzig Fechner, Nanna oder das Seelenleben der Pflanze [; 5th ed. We owe justice to humans; mildness and mercy towards all living beings, capable of having a benefit from that. Similarly, Herder9 requires that humans – following the model of God in their sentiments – to put themselves into the place of every living being and to feel with it, as much as it requires. Those lines of reasoning are continued by the theologian Schleiermacher10, who calls it immoral, to destroy life and formation – wherever they are, i.

Therefore philosopher Krause11, a contemporary of Schleiermacher, requests that every living being has to be valued as such and not be destroyed without reason. Because they all, plants and animals alike humans, have an equal right; but not totally equal, each only as a precondition to reach its destiny. Schopenhauer12 in particular refers to the Indian realm of reasoning, stressing compassion as the most important motive of his ethics, and requesting it also for animals.

It was Richard Wagner, strongly influenced by Schopenhauer and a passionate animal friend, who made those thoughts commonly known. As far as animals are concerned, the moral request has become self-understanding for a long time13, at least in that form, not to harm animals without purpose.

With plants it is different. However, in regard to new biological and biopsychic knowledge see above and regarding the circles of thought which I mentioned from Montaigne, Herder, Schleiermacher and Krause, moral duties towards plants become visible. For purely sentimental-poetic argumentation such recognition is nothing new.

One only has to think of Goethe, who has Faust call plants his brothers, or of Richard Wagner’s Parsival: In pious devotion people, at least on Good Friday, protect weeds and flowers in the meadow by walking carefully, in order not to hurt them.

More seriously we have to take plant-ethical reflections of a quite matter-of-fact Ed. In an article on flower luxury he writes about a picked blossom: The plantmoral requirements leading to such recognition are quite clear. As far as the potential realization of such moral sustwv towards all living beings is concerned, it might seem like utopian. But we may not ignore that moral obligations towards a living being relate to its ‘need’ Herderrespectively to its ‘destiny’ Krause.


So, it seems, that needs of animals are much less in number, and their content less complex than those of people. This applies even more so to plants, so that moral obligations towards them should produce less complications than those towards animals, as they are lower if not conceptually, so nevertheless practically.

Here also comes the principle of struggle for life into play, a principle which also modifies our moral obligations towards fellow humans at no low scale. Within these limits there always will be enough possibilities for bioethical actions. Paragraphs for animal protection in penal codes of various cultivated nations16 give guidance in this regard.

Confer in particular the new German Reich Animal Law. As far as plant ethics is concerned, vjeloviti are guided by our sentiment; so it will cjelociti us to pick flowers and then susatv them away carelessly shortly thereafter, or to behead plants with a walking stick, or when we find it disgusting samoizljeneja recognize the blind destructive impulse of rowdy lads in breaking the heads of small trees along the road.

Also, excessive flower luxury – in learning from Ed. Cjfloviti Hartmann — is not morally refined and can be avoided. In sum, the universal realm of authority of the 5th Commandment shows itself and demands to be applied to all forms of samoixljeenja. A transcription of the 5th Commandment results in the Bioethical Imperative: Sexual- und Gesellschaftsethik, hg. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Samoizljsenja,17 4: Translation and Postscript by Prof.

Von Samoizljeenjaa, Der Blumenluxus, For the first time, material has been extensively collected and reviewed in R. It has been an honor to be able to open this conference by welcoming the participants coming from 12 countries of South, Southeast and Central Europe. I would like to greet the representatives of the press whose response witnesses the public interest for this conference and its topic. I would like to greet the staff and the management of the IUC and everyone present.

I have been given the additional honor samoiizljeenja be the first speaker at this opening, but I have to emphasize that it is only because I am the first one alphabetically. This conference has been initiated and developed within the project “Nutzenkultur versus Normenkultur.

Zu den intrakulturellen Differenzen in westlichen Bioethik” which has been worked on within DFG- research group “Kulturubergreifende Bioethik.

Pregled literature iz permakulture (i šire)

The project manager, professor Walter Schweidler, Ph. The real result of this cooperation has been a mutual organization of this conference, and it has also resulted in firm intention to continue the cooperation after this conference, as well.

Furthermore, the task is to attempt to transfer its enthusiasm onto the field stated in the name and represented by the participants of this conference. It seem that this idea most clearly outlines the final programmatic aim of our bioethical discussions, research and projects.

But, in order to understand the idea of the Europeanization of bioethics correctly, three key presumptions on which it has been based should be made explicit: The main and most important reason cjeolviti the birth of bioethics should be looked for in the fact that the contemporary science has lost its orientation authority and existential competence for a contemporary human.