Freedom to Choose Between Good and Evil: Theological Anthropology in Discussion with Philosophy

After a brief discussion of the terms determinism and free will, the paper sets out to compare some recent philosophical approaches to the problem of free will with a theological anthropology account of the notion. It aims to defend the claim, that even though different kind of questions are asked on both sides, they tackle similar issues and a complementary approach is needed. Recent philosophy considers the problem mostly from the standpoint of logic, naturalist evolutionary ontology and cognitive science. In the Christian theological tradition, the idea of free will has been discussed mostly from the perspective of the problem of sin and grace, thus on the grounds of soteriology, hamartiology and theological ethics. The paper shows similarities between the approaches, mainly between the problem of physical determinism and theological determinism and also divine foreknowledge.

Foster Parents’ Readiness for the Implementation of Foster Family Pedagogy

It can be observed that changing attitude towards the environment and fellow human beings manifests itself as a socially unsustainable relationship, which in different ways and at different levels manifests itself in social exclusion. Social exclusion is increasingly emerging as a phenomenon that is complex in nature and its solutions must be sought in the wicked problem approach, which is characteristic of complex problems and has significant ontological roots. At present, ontology should consider the much more complicated problem of what types of being are formed by both the natural and the cultural evolutionary processes. It can be argued that evolutionary ontology attempts to create a new image of the world and of humans – a new non-anthropocentric cosmology, i.e., a consistently philosophical culturological cosmology that takes into account reality in its real structure as a conflict between the spontaneous activity of nature and the socio-cultural activity of humans (Šmajs, 2008, p. 96). The reasons for social exclusion can be different, and its specific manifestations are various, and the same can be said about the phenomenon of social inclusion, which is the expression of the quality of other relationships and attitudes. Externally observable signs of social exclusion are more closely related to the concept of families at risk. A social risk family can be defined as a family that experiences difficult problems and has limited opportunities to provide favorable living conditions for the comprehensive development of all family members. More and more often it is associated with unsustainable cultural or non-cultural contexts, mainly related to non-ecological culture prosperity in the consumer society. It can be noted that this context in its current form (which includes manufacturing, consumption, material culture, and technology, and both the social, intellectual, and material life of humans) is quite anti-natural oriented in its principle. Unfortunately, the aggressive anti-natural sociocultural strategy permeated also the field of human upbringing and education (Šmajs, 2008, p. 194). At the beginning of the 21st century, it has emerged as the Anthropocene era in a broader sense, in which the geological characterization of the era is complemented by the characterization of the sustainability of public relations in a broader holistic perspective. The aim of the article is to consider a number of real cases in a broader perspective from the point of view of foster family pedagogy, identify the choice of foster care approaches and evaluate the results obtained. From the perspective of foster family pedagogy, foster parents and foster children are participants in the lifelong learning process, where the mutual influence and interaction of foster parents and foster children are studied. The authors evaluated real situations from the perspective of foster family pedagogy and children’s involvement in the family structure. The article also examines the influence of the foster family and its readiness to overcome the effects of Anthropocene unsustainability.

Evolutionary ontology and biofile transformation of culture

The author claims that two large transformations of the human adaptive strategy have occurred in the course of our species’ history: first, the self-preservation modification at the beginning of the anatomically modern humans’ origination; second, the spiritual abandonment of live nature two millennia before the end of the Neolithic culture. Moreover the third transformation, the shift from the predatory spiritual paradigm to the biofile paradigm, has to be undergone today. This transformation is specified with respect to the natural sciences and education system. *** Ontologia evolutiva e transformação biofílica da cultura ***O autor afirma que no curso da história da nossa espécie ocorreram duas grandes transformações na estratégia adaptativa humana: primeiro, a modificação da autopreservação no início da origem anatomicamente moderna dos humanos; segundo, o abandono espiritual da natureza viva dois milênios antes do fim da cultura neolítica. E a terceira transformação, esta a ser efetivada hoje, corresponde à mudança do paradigma espiritual predatório para o paradigma biofílico. Essa transformação é especificamente relativa às ciências naturais e ao sistema educacional.Palavras-chave: Ontologia evolutiva. Natureza. Cultura. Paradigma espiritual predatório. Paradigma espiritual biofílico.

Modernism and nihilism of the Constitution for the Earth

This article uses the post-modern Nietzsche affirmation as a criterion for an analysis of the philosophical concept of the Constitution for the Earth (Šmajs, 2015) and other texts by Josef Šmajs, the principal author of the theory of evolutionary ontology. The author draws the attention of the group of authors of the Constitution for the Earth to the risk of the modernist and nihilist application of evolutionary ontology and proposes that the theory be extended to include new criteria and methods to enable it to be applied in a more acceptable manner. The author places efforts aimed at the biophilic transformation of culture into the value-based and ethical framework of moderate anthropocentrism instead of the ecocentric approach preferred by the creators of evolutionary ontology. The author also underlines the risk of the application of an ecocentric approach through the application of recent analysis of media presentations of those who support and deny climate change in the work entitled Environmental Ethics and Behavioural Change (Franks, Hanscomb & Johnston, 2018).

Can Thomism and Pragmatism Cooperate?

The paper explores the possibility of philosophical cooperation between Thomism and American Pragmatism by resurrecting a largely forgotten debate between Wilmon Henry Sheldon and Jacques Maritain. The discussion focuses primarily on two topics: the compatibility between a substance ontology and a pragmatist-evolutionary ontology, and the compatibility between the scholastic and the pragmatist theories of truth. The paper claims that, if we bring Peirce’s version of pragmatism into the picture, cooperation is not only possible but likely to be fruitful.