Evolution of perception of “living” in religious and philosophical discourse
Keywords:existence, human, life, living, concept, discourse, religion, ethics, bioethics, value
Modern scientific discourse, basing on the postnonclassical scientific world picture and on the permanent-transitive fluctuations of the postmodern period, still includes such eternal questions as the problem of a man, human life and health, the fundamental factors of the world and human being in the world.
Life is the only biologically possible way of human being in the world. Its value lies not only in the specificities of existing biological forms and various manifestations, which are nevertheless a unique phenomenon of being in their totality, but also in the possibility of self-reflection, conscious experience of the phenomenon itself and the ability to form symbolic pictures of the existential world on this basis.
The purpose of the article is to examine the transformation of scientific discourse on the concept of “living” within the framework of the formation and development of religious and ethical studies.
To achieve this purpose, the author analyzes the categorical framework of the concept of “living”. Analyzing classical philosophical and modern scientific approaches to the definition of the concept of “living”, the author distinguishes two main approaches to the definition of life: substrate and functional.
In the article the main attention is focused on the analysis of religious and bioethical discourses in the study of “living”.
Bioethical discourse proceeds from the need for identifying moral norms and imperatives that can answer the question of the limits of the existence of “living” and determine the moral possibilities of impact (expansion or narrowing) on these limits. One of the fundamental problems of bioethics is the problem of life as a value. In modern bioethical discourse there are two main points of view in this regard. The first may be named the ethics of the sacrality of life or life as the highest value (sanctity of life), the second – the ethics of the quality life (quality of life). The sacrality of life implies an attitude to the phenomenon of “living” as to the object of exceptional weight, of the most important value, and on this basis requires a reverent attitude to it. This approach has the most clear and full representation by modern religious discourse.
The religious content of the bioethical discourse on “living” is manifested, firstly, in approval of the objective ontological status of the human personality by the Christian personalism; secondly, in the teachings of Christian theologians who claim the beauty and righteousness of life created by God, where nature and human are understood as something sacral, and therefore the actions against them are sinful and unacceptable; thirdly, the basis of human life is rooted in the spiritual world of human himself related to the divine transcendence.
In is concluded that modern religious and ethical discourse forms a system of categories and concepts that describe applied ethical conceptual constructs in order to form a person’s moral attitude to all living. The proposed author’s approach allowed establishing the essence of modern bioethical discourse in the study of “living”.
Aristotle (2000). Politics (translat. from ancient Greek). Kyiv (In Ukrainian).
Averintsev, S. (1989). Filosofskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar, Moscow, 1989, P. 192 (In Russian)
Balashov, N. (1998). Iskusstvennoye oplodotvoreniye: chto dumayut pravoslavnyye? Bioetika: printsipy, pravila, problemy, Moscow: Editorial URSS. (In Russian).
Boyko I.Ye. (2011). Identychnist i status lyudskoho embriona u suchasnykh bioetychnykh dyskusiyakh. Naukovi zapysky Natsionalnoho universytetu «Ostrozka akademiya». Seriya: Filosofiya, Issue 8. Pp. 217-229. (In Ukrainian).
Collange, J.-F. (1992). Bioetika i protestantizm in Medicine and Human Rights, Moscow: Progress-Inter, p. 41-44. (In Russian)
Donum Vitae: Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation Replies to certain questions of the day. Retrieved from http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html (23.04.2019) (In English).
Dyachenko, G. (1993). Polnyy Tserkovno-slavyanskiy slovar, Moscow (In Russian)
Horban, O. and Martych, R. (2017). Basic approaches to the definition of the essence of the concept of "living". Studia Warminskie, nr 54, р. 93-103. (In Russian)
Horban, O. and Martych, R. (2017). Fenomen «zhyvoho» v kontekste sovremennoho pravoslavnoho dyskursa. Naukovi pratsi Chornomorskoho natsionalʹnoho universytetu im. Petra Mohyly. Seriya Filosofiya. Vol. 300, Issue 288, pp. 55-59. (In Russian).
Horban, O. and Martych, R. (2018). Axiological determinants of the doctrine of “living” in modern bioethic discourse. Studia Warminskie. nr 55, p. 93-106. (In Russian) DOI: https://doi.org/10.31648/sw.3064
Kharakas, S. (1998). Pravoslaviye i bioetika. Bioetika: printsipy, pravila, problemy. Moscow: Editorial URSS. (In Russian).
Mc Donald, H. D. (2003). The View of Man. Theological Dictionary (translat. from English), Moscow (In Russian)
Melety (Metropolitan of Nikopol) (1992). Aborty (Otnosheniye k nim Pravoslavnoy Tserkvi), Kyiv: Izdatelstvo UFIMB. (In Russian).
Plato (1971). Timey (translat. from ancient Greek), Moscow (In Russian)
Plato (1999). Zakony (translat. from ancient Greek), Moscow (In Russian)
Plotinus (1995) Eneady (translat. from ancient Greek). Kyiv, P. 348-352 (In Russian).
Rikkert, G. (1998). Filosofia zhizni, Kiyv: Nika-Tsentr: Vist-S (In Russian).
Saint Basil the Great (2008). Pravyla svyatoho Vasyliya Velykoho v Knyha pravyl svyatykh apostoliv vselensʹkykh i pomisnykh soboriv, i svyatykh ottsiv. Ukrayinska pravoslavna tserkva Kyyivskoho patriarkhatu, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
Siluyanova, I.V. (2001). Bioetika v Rossii: tsennosti i zakony, Moscow: Grant. (In Russian)
Stott, J. (2004). Novyye problemy khristian (translat. from English). Cherkassy : SMIRNA (In Russian).
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2019 Ruslana Martych
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Authors bear responsibility for the accuracy of facts, quotations, numbers and names used.
2. Manuscripts are not sent back.
3. The publisher does not always agree with the authors' opinion.
4. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
5. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.