Livro de Resumos do Encontro sobre Fritz Jahr (Rijeka/Croácia 2011)

EUROBIO ETHICSN Abstract book March 11-12, 2011 Rijeka – Croatia 1st international conference FRITZ JAHR AND EUROPEAN ROOTS OF BIOETHICS: ESTABLISHING AN INTERNATIONAL SCHOLARS’ NETWORK 1st international conference FRITZ JAHR AND EUROPEAN ROOTS OF BIOETHICS: ESTABLISHING AN INTERNATIONAL SCHOLARS’ NETWORK Rijeka (Croatia), March 11-12, 2011 Abstract book Organized by/at: Department of Social Sciences and Medical Humanities at University of Rijeka - Faculty of Medicine, Rijeka (Croatia) Co-ordinating institution: Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC (USA) Partner institution: Centre for Medical Ethics, Ruhr University, Bochum (Germany) Co-ordinators: Amir Muzur and Hans-Martin Sass EUROBIO ETHICS AOOTS N Organisation Board: Ante Čović Nada Gosić Hrvoje Jurić Amir Muzur Iva Rinčić Hans-Martin Sass Izdavač/Publisher: Katedra za društvene i humanističke znanosti u medicini Medicinskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Rijeci / Department of Social Sciences and Medical Humanities, University of Rijeka – Faculty of Medicine Uredili/Editors: Amir Muzur & Iva Rinčić Grafi čko oblikovanje i tisak: Digital Point Rijeka Tiskano u Rijeci, ožujak 2011. / Printed in Rijeka (Croatia) in March 2011 Izdavač i urednici nisu odgovorni za eventualne propuste u sadržaju ili jezičnom izrazu u tekstu sažetaka objavljenih u ovoj knjižici.

Th e Publisher and the Editors do not feel responsible for any substantial or linguis- tic imperfection that might be found in the abstracts published in this booklet. ISBN 978-953-6384-72-3 CIP zapis dostupan u računalnom katalogu Sveučilišne knjižnice Rijeka pod brojem 120820068 5 Contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Abstracts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13 Address book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Sponsors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 7 Preface Fortunately, science and knowledge do not know of any boundaries. How- ever, this does not and should not mean that there are instant solutions and elsewhere-prepared packages of ideas to be used as panacea for a troubled mind. At the beginning of the 1970s, a brilliant thinker, Van Rensellaer Potter, and the resourceful and operative André Hellegers, correctly diagnozed the threat of the expanding technology and medicine.

Faced with similar prob- lems but lacking her own answers, Europe eventually embraced Potter’s and Helleger’s – American – bioethics (to be frank, with quite a delay and unwill- ingness). Th at bioethics, however, based primarily upon pragmatism, princi- palism, and other typically American values and beliefs, has proved to be of a very limited success in coping with modern-time dilemmas. And then, something occured that added optimism: a »new« bioethics was discovered, fi fty years older than the Potter’s one, and, what is more important – a bioethics which had been born in the heart of Europe.

Th e disclosure of a humble sickly German theologian and teacher who had published his fi rst and most important work in 1927, has not meant only the shift of dates in bioethics history: it has meant a new hope for bioethics to be interpreted in a diff erent way, to be explored from diff erent angles, to be directed toward the more specifi c needs of Europe. Once again, that incredibly complex and opu- lent continent has proven to be capable of being original and autochthonous. And, as it often occurs with discoveries of that kind, Fritz Jahr has opened the way to study Aristotle, Kant, Schopenhauer, and so many other bioethics precursors.

Turning to those persons and topics does not mean to close for others, nor to break up with the »American« bioethics: it only means that Europe once again has rediscovered her own potentials and strengths which, due to their enrootedness in the specifi c culture, might be more helpful in fi nding the way out from the imposed blind alleys. In order to discuss the further development of the investigation and pro- 8 motion of the European bioethics concept, we have gathered in Rijeka a group of scientists from all over the world, sharing the interest in that new and rap- idly expanding fi eld. Rolf Löther, the Berlin Humboldt University Professor who was the fi rst to discover Jahr’s work, has unfortunately been not in condi- tion to travel, but expressed his support.

Two persons who have disseminated Löther’s discovery – Eve-Marie Engels and José Roberto Goldim – are here, as well as Hans-Martin Sass, who has been the fi rst to study Jahr’s work in depth and whom I have been very grateful for all the »Co-ordinatorial« support he has given to me. Like always, we have to thank also Professor Ante Čović from Zagreb and his collaborators, with whom we have been combining organisa- tional eff orts since the very beginning. Cornelia Bauer (Germany/Columbia), Bert Gordijn (Ireland), Gonzalo Herranz (Spain), Fernando Pascual (Italy), Eimantas Peicius (Lithuania), and Leo Pessini (Brazil), unfortunately were not able to attend.

We are specially honoured that our ideas related to European bioethics have been welcomed also by Nuria Terribas, head of the oldest Euro- pean bioethics centre – the Borja de Bioètica institute in Barcelona. Our mini-conference devoted to Fritz Jahr, attended both by some of the major bioethics scholars and by the representatives of younger generations, has never intended to become a meeting of »Jahrologists«: on the contrary, Fritz Jahr has primarily been conceived as a symbol of the reappraisal of our common, unsufi ciently explored European tradition. Amir Muzur Programme 10 Friday, March 11, 2011 Symposium »Fritz Jahr and European bioethics: status quaestionis« Location: University of Rijeka - Faculty of Medicine, 3 rd fl oor, room: »Vijećnica« 11.00 – 11.30 Greetings and opening lectures Amir Muzur (Rijeka) Fritz Jahr (1895-1953): a sketch for biography Hans-Martin Sass (Bochum/Washington/Beijing) Translational ethics: how to translate tradition into the future?

11.30 – 12.30 European bioethics Ante Čović (Zagreb) Integrative bioethics as an original SE-European »product« Nada Gosić (Rijeka) Th e actuality of thoughts of Fritz Jahr in bioethics education or Why Fritz Jahr advocates character education Iva Rinčić (Rijeka) European bioethics institutionalisation in theory and practice Christian Byk (Paris) Bioethics, law and European construction 12.30 – 12.45 Discussion 12.45 – 13.00 Coff ee break 13.00 – 14.00 European culture, philosophy, and science as forerunners of bioethics (I) Eleni Kalokairinou (Nicosia/Th essaloniki) Tracing the roots of the european bioethics to the ancient greek philoso- phers-physicians Ivana Zagorac (Zagreb) St.

Francis of Assisi: bioethics in european middle ages 11 Igor Eterović (Rijeka) Th e categorical imperative of Immanuel Kant in the light of the bioethical imperative of Fritz Jahr Eve-Marie Engels (Tübingen) Th e importance of Charles Darwin’s theory for Fritz Jahr’s conception of bioethics 14.00 – 14.15 Discussion 14.15 – 15.45 Lunch break 15.45 – 16.45 European culture, philosophy, and science as forerunners of bioethics (II) José-Robeto Goldim (Porto Alegre) Albert Schweitzer, a bioethics precursor Hrvoje Jurić (Zagreb) Hans Jonas’ integrative philosophy of life as a foothold for integrative bioethics Fernando Lolas Stepke (Santiago de Chile) Bioethics and anthropological medicine: the early history Marija Selak (Zagreb) Philosophy of Karl Löwith as a precursor and incentive to the idea of inte- grative bioethics 16.45 – 17.00 Discussion 17.00 – 17.30 European bioethics outside Europe Ricardo Andrés Roa-Castellanos (Bogotá) Bioethical common factors amid Krause’s masonry and Saint Francis’ of Assisi appeal to respectful dialogue, nature and understanding: Jahr’s dia- logue beyond the age of »enlightenment« and the »dark« ages Natacha Lima (Buenos Aires) Th e perspective of bioethics in Latin America following Jahr’s guidelines 17.30 – 18.00 Final discussion and concluding remarks 12 Saturday, March 12, 2011 Meeting and discussion on future collaboration and projects Location: Grand hotel 4 opatijska cvijeta, 9:30 a.m Moderators: A.

Muzur & H.-M. Sass Proposed topics: • information on current activities (the Jahr Annual; publications by H.-M. Sass; the Zürich conference; etc.) • establishment of a website devoted to Fritz Jahr and European bioethics • publication of Fritz Jahr’s works and the works on Fritz Jahr and European bioethics in various journals, countries, and translations • establishment of a »Fritz-Jahr Award for European Bioethics Re- search and Promotion« (referee: I. Rinčić) • discussion of the proposal of »Rijeka Declaration on the Impor- tance and Future of European Bioethics« • future meetings of the group • other ideas and suggestions Abstracts 15 Christan Byk Bioethics, law and European construction Bioethics is always described as implying a multidisciplinary and plural- istic approach of the issues encompassed.

No doubt that the law and lawyers have deeply contributed to its origin and present development. However, con- versely to the United States, it seems that bioethics has opened some new per- spectives to the law in Europe. First, it forced the law to move out of its own frontiers and to apply its reasoning to life sciences issues with the consequence that some consider that the legal norms are used to legitimate unlawful prac- tices while others believe legal norms have imposed binding conditions to the free development of science and technology. Second, Europe is the only region of the world where biomedical techniques are subjected to legal and sometimes binding harmonisation.

In some way, we may conclude that the role played by the law in the elaboration of a European bioethics is just an example of the important role of the law in the European construction. 16 Ante Čović Integrative bioethics as an original SE-European »product« Presented will briefl y be the idea of integrative bioethics, conceived within the region of SE Europe and developed into a rounded-off concept within a broader international bioethics project. Integrative bioethics will be pre- sented in three aspects: 1) as a programme; 2) as a project, and 3) as a con- cept. Since the beginning, integrative bioethics has been oriented toward the programme task of »bioethics Europeisation«, clearly charted already at the international conference »Bioethics in South- and SE Europe: chances for an integrative-ethical refl exion in front of the European intercultural diff ereces background« (Inter-University Centre, Dubrovnik, October 1-3, 2004).

With that conference, also a great bioethics project was lounched developing and institutionalizing bioethical collaboration in SE-European region, in which the bioethicists from almost all SE-European countries were participating, as well as from Italy, Austria, and Germany. Within the project, several in- stitutions have been developed (Bioethical Forum for SE Europe, Integrative Bioethics Summer School, Referal Centre for Bioethics in SE Europe). Th e most important achievement of the project certainly has been the innova- tive concept of integrative bioethics, which has become the ideological basis of the entire project and a recognizable contribution to the development of bioethics in global relations.

In its substantial dimension, integrative bioethics is characterized by a broad fi eld spanning from moral dilemmas in medical practice and biomedical research, determination of the moral status of non- human living beings, thematizing of ecological issues, of the role of science and technology in modern civilisation, debate on the character of our epoch and the signs of the exchange of epochs, all up to the theoretical foundation of a new universal-historical epoch. In it methodological aspect, integrative bioethics is characterized by an expressed interdisciplinarity, respect for and including into the debate of a relevant circle of special scientifi c disciplines, 17 but also a circle of non-scientifi c perspectives encompassed by the concept of »cultural perspectives«.

Within that context, the notion of pluriperspectivism has emerged as a methodological determination of integrative bioethics, in- corporating scientifi c and cultural perspectives. 18 Eve-Marie Engels Th e importance of Charles Darwin’s theory for Fritz Jahr’s conception of bioethics In his pioneer article on bioethics Fritz Jahr emphasises the importance of scientifi c insights into the relationship between the human being and na- ture for a new view of nature. In this context he mentions the crucial role of Darwin’s theory for bridging the gap between the human being, animals and plants. »Th ese very scientifi c triumphs of the human mind have deprived mankind himself/herself of his/her dominant position in the world.« (Jahr) In my presentation I will point out the importance of Darwin’s theory for Fritz Jahr’s type of bioethics.

19 Igor Eterović Th e categorical imperative of Immanuel Kant in the light of the bioethical imperative of Fritz Jahr Immanuel Kant and Fritz Jahr have a similar cultural background, despite the almost two centuries gap between their lifetimes. Th ey were both raised in protestant tradition and lived their whole lives in towns with rich cultural heritage of the Prussian Kingdom. In the light of these contextual circumstances, maybe Jahr’s inspiration by Kant is not surprising. Jahr quotes Kant, but – what is more important – he takes terminology of Kant’s practical philosophy in formulation of his own views.

Th e most striking example is Jahr’s formulation of his bioethical impera- tive which directly echoes Kant’s (ethical) categorical imperative. Th ose two imperatives will be compared and some points about possible challenges and perspectives which Jahr’s views poses to Kant’s thought have been given in this presentation. 20 José Roberto Goldim Albert Schweitzer: a bioethics precursor Precursor only exists, as a precursor, when related to recognized and poste- rior author. In terms of thoughts, a precursor didn’t precede, he coexist. One marvelous example of coexistence is Albert Schweitzer and Fritz Jahr.

Jahr is not a Potter precursor; he coined Bioethics as a word. Jahr is the founder. He made a rupture in the history of Ethics, when he proposed the Bioethics Imperative. I will present some highlights related to Bioethics, in the vast and diverse intellectual production of Albert Schweitzer. Th e Ethics of the Reverence for Life, fi rst coined in a sermon in 1919, is based in Virtue Ethics. Reverence for Life is another kind of love, as a virtue. Reverence for Life is beyond self-sacrifi ce, self-fulfi llment and self-improvement, is a creative force related to civilisation. In 1923, in a magnifi cent book is – Civilisation and Ethics – Albert Schweitzer described his proposal in details.

In an article, published in 1936 he consolidated his thoughts about humanity, civilisation, ethics, life and living. We must recognize the importance of Albert Schweitzer in the history of Bioethics. 21 Nada Gosić Th e actuality of thoughts of Fritz Jahr in bioethics education or why Fritz Jahr advocates character education Th is title is set to achieve two goals. First, to explain reasons and motives for character education, and second, to actualise the approach of Fritz Jahr in the conception of contents, methodology of implementation and methods of evaluation in the bioethics education of future medical and health service pro- viders.

Th e realisation of the fi rst goal leads to a quotation and explanation of institutional and extra-institutional infl uence on the understanding of ethics and morality, nature and methods of ethical decision-making and behaviour of students. Th e second goal has the intention to show how the pluralism of values, ideas, scientifi c and extra-scientifi c initiatives, forms of ethical behav- iour, application of ethical standards, rules and principles – component parts of Jahr’s decorum – helps students in critical consideration and in their rela- tionship to the profession they shall practise in the future.

22 Hrvoje Jurić Hans Jonas’ integrative philosophy of life as a foothold for integrative bioethics European approach to bioethical problems – which is developed before or parallel to the »offi cial emergence« of bioethics in 1960s and 1970s – empha- sizes a need for the widened and deepened consideration of the very notion of life, which should be taken in account when speaking about ethical dimen- sions of manipulation with the life at diff erent levels. It could be traced in the works of Fritz Jahr, Albert Schweitzer, Georg Picht, Klaus Michael Meyer- Abich and especially Hans Jonas (1903–1993).

In that sense, we should take into consideration not only Jonas’ ethics of responsibility, developed in the late phase of his life and formulated in the philosophical bestseller Das Prinzip Verantwortung, but also his long-term re- search of Gnostic religion and thought, as well as his attempt to establish the philosophical biology as a new philosophy of the human, nature and life. Jonas developed the integrative philosophy of life in which centre stands ethically connotated philosophy of nature, based both on the results of contemporary natural sciences and theological speculations. In this presentation I will try to show how the synergy of evolutionist- biological, teleological-philosophical and religious-theological approaches contributes to the decryption of the notion of life, i.e. to establishing the integrative philosophy of life which implies respect and responsibility for the nature and life in general.

Jonas’ integrative philosophy of life shows us clearly what pluri-perspec- tivity and integrativity in bioethics actually mean, because it is far from any reductionism and tries to include diff erent scientifi c and non-scientifi c per- spectives, off ering at the same time a platform for their dialogical mediation. 23 Eleni Kalokairinou Tracing the roots of the European bioethics to the Ancient Greek philosophers-physicians In studying the origins of the European Bioethics it would have been a serious omission if we did not turn to people like Hippocrates, Galen and Celsus who admittedly laid the foundations of the modern discipline known under the name of Bioethics.

For, apart from their strict medical treatises, Hippocrates, Galen and their contemporary physicians composed certain deontological treatises to which can be traced all the principles of modern Bioethics. However, before one examines the content of the Ancient Greek deontology and the way in which it has infl uenced contemporary Bioethics, one has to consider the medical art or »science« as this was conceived and practised in antiquity. In the present paper, therefore, I will fi rst introduce ancient medicine, I will point out that initially it was indistinguishable from magic and explain that it was philosophy and the fi rst Greek philosophers who helped medicine become independent of divinity and divine thinking.

I will also bring out that at a later stage medicine is closely related to philosophy, since both phy- sicians and philosophers at that time were equally concerned with studying human nature. Consequently, I will examine very briefl y the Presocratic phi- losophers’ medical views, I will put forward Plato’s views on disease, as these are presented in his dialogue Timaeus and I will present some basic medical/ biological theses which Aristotle suggests in his work which, as one has to rec- ognize, have been seriously overlooked so far. In the end, I will complete my contribution by presenting two aspects of Hippocrates’ work: the fi rst is that Hippocrates is the iatrophilosopher of antiquity who succeeds in distinguish- ing medicine from philosophy; and the second is that he is the fi rst physician of the ancient world who introduces and engages in medical deontology.

24 Natacha Lima Th e perspective of bioethics in Latin America following Jahr’s guidelines Fritz Jahr introduced the concept of bioethics in a visionary way and in dialogue with science, philosophy, and the art of his time (Th eodor Fechner, Rudof Eiler, Friedrich Ernst, Daniel Schleiermacher, Arthur Schopenhauer, and Richard Wagner, among others.) He established the birth of bioethics re- lated to major scientifi c, philosophical, aesthetic and political transformations of the latest nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century. Nowadays »Bioethical thinking« raises multiple and controversial ques- tions.

It is a huge challenge that has often forced us to raise the bar. Due to technical advances and social changes (technological, medical, biological, po- litical, etc.), the fi eld of »human inquiries« has been questioned. Th e discovery of Fritz Jahr’s work has broadened our horizons, and that’s why we are going to follow his steps to approach our current work and practice. With the aim of interdisciplinary work and thinking, many disciplines have been convened to start the exchange. Th e aim of this paper is to point out this »conversation« between diff erent disciplinary fi elds in order to be better equipped to think about these issues.

Th e use of audio-visual resources is an interesting means to explore dilemmatic situations. Since 1996 the Ethics and Human Rights Department of the University of Buenos Aires (UBA) has been using fi lms as a pathway to thinking and teaching ethical issues from a Human Rights perspective. Since its origins, the world of cinema has promoted awareness of ethical problems and movies have become an exceptional medium for the exploration of ethical-psychological issues. With the expansion of the fi lm industry, ethical issues have reached wider audiences, promoting exciting dis- cussions, which provide an extraordinary opportunity for academic thought and refl ection.

25 Fernando Lolas Stepke Bioethics and anthropological medicine: the early history Th e European Zeitgeist between the First and the Second World War was prone to change, innovation and perception of cultural crisis. At about the same time that Fritz Jahr gave birth to the ideas surrounding his concepts of Bio-Ethik, in Germany developed a form of humanisation of medicine that was epitomized by one of its intellectual champions, Victor von Weizsäcker, as the re-introduction of the subject into medicine. Rooted in the same religious tradition of Protestantism, both Jahr and Weizsäcker made proposals for the conceptual reformulation of disciplines concerned with Nature and with hu- mankind, insisting upon the ethical foundations of their practice.

A common key concept in both frameworks is that of solidarity (Solidarität), with all liv- ing beings in one case, with all human subjects in the other. Another nucleus of the ethical analysis introduced by the Heidelberg School of anthropologi- cal medicine was provided by the concept of reciprocity (Gegenseitigkeit). A comparative analysis of both attempts at crisis resolution in the European republican era uncovers common areas of concern, the need for the rediscov- ery of meaning through religious experience, and a perception of future de- velopments that in the long run would prove to be of little, albeit important, practical impact on the exercise of the scientifi c professions.

26 Amir Muzur Fritz Jahr (1895-1953): a sketch for biography Until a few years ago, the American biochemist Van Rensselaer Potter (1911-2001) was generally acknowledged as the fi rst person to have used the term »bioethics«. In 1997, however, Rolf Löther mentioned the name of Fritz Jahr, whom Löther credited for having coined the word Bio-Ethik as early as 1927. News about the discovery of Fritz Jahr eventually spread and a more thorough analysis of Jahr’s basic ideas has been off ered by Hans-Martin Sass of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics. While the work of Fritz Jahr has been investigated, his life is still quite a mystery.

A preliminary search of the archives in Jahr’s home city of Halle (Germany) has turned up a lot of interesting data. Paul Max Fritz Jahr was born on January 18, 1895, in Halle in central Ger- many, where he spent his entire life. Schooled mostly in the Pietist Francke Foundation, at the University, Jahr studied philosophy, music, history, na- tional economy, and theology. Jahr started to teach as early as 1917, while within the Church he was ac- tive from 1925 onwards. First he was a curate at St. John’s church in Dieskau, later in Braunsdorf, and fi nally, a pastor in Canena. In 1932, Jahr married Elise Neuholz with whom he had no children.

At the age of 38, on March 1, 1933, he withdrew from service. Fritz Jahr died on October 1, 1953, in Halle. Th e facts related to Fritz Jahr’s life, highlighted in the present paper, might explain not only the sources of his ideas, but also some important motiva- tions for them. In our analyses of the »social circumstances« of a discovery, we often neglect the personal factors that may have infl uenced the author of the discovery. Th erefore, the life story of Fritz Jahr might easily prove to be one of the life stories of bioethics itself. 27 Iva Rinčić European bioethics institutionalisation in theory and practice Th e starting point of this paper is the defi nition of the role the institution has had in modern (European) society, as well as the exploring of the impor- tance of the institutionalisation process.

According to the opinion advocated in this paper, institutionalisation is the process of the establishment of diff er- ent normative and organisational institutions. Since V. R. Potter for the fi rst time used the term bioethics, this word has rapidly conquered various levels of the American society, becoming well known and even better present in a series of institutions. At the same time, al- most contrary to the American example and experience, European continent has for a long time been resistant to the term of bioethics, as well as to the very idea of such discipline. Until recently, European devotion to the traditional terms (medical ethics, biomedical ethics, deontology, etc.) and the misconcep- tion of (American) bioethics, has been one of the reasons of the lack of or poor bioethical institutionalisation in European countiries and the Union.

Being discovered in 1997 and promoted since 2007, the work of Fritz Jahr spreads new lights onto the originality and authenticity of bioethical ideas in Europe. Having in mind that one of the main reasons of bioethics success in the USA was its institutionalisation, the European bioethics has still to ac- complish a lot in this fi eld. In this paper, the main contribution of Arnold Gehlen’s theory of institution is explored, as well as Fritz Jahr’s recommenda- tions for institutional bioethics. 28 Ricardo-Andrés Roa-Castellanos Bioethical common factors amid Krause masonry and Saint Francis of Assisi appeal to respectful dialogue, nature and understanding: the Jahr’s dialogue beyond the age of »enlightenment« and the »dark« ages It has been known that the fi rst reference of the word Bioethics in the twentieth century was due to German theologist Fritz Jahr in 1927.

In that surprising paper Jahr, a protestant Lutheran university professor, proposes humble deacon Saint Francis of Assisi (1181-1226), as the fi rst discoverer of Bioethics. At the same time, Jahr quotes K.C.F Krause, a Masonic mathemat- ics and philosophy doctor, who is referred within this manuscript because of his ideas on Life respect regarding also any species. Saint Francis, a medieval icon who prevails as the devoted catholic patron of ecologists and peacemak- ers, was the rebuilder of the catholic faith during those chaotic and exces- sively theological times. Krause was expelled from the Masonic movement (1810) while Saint Francis was advised to become a hermit (1209) to be kept aside from the community due to his somehow rebellious strict observance of the original gospel in times when richness and vanity were becoming a sign of social success.

Krause and Assisi understood that the enlighten messages and teachings cannot be contained in restricted canonic books neither for the Masonic nor for the Catholic believers in need. In separate ways they start to diff use altruistic doctrines based on public pacifi c revolutions, respect for life, productive dialogue on diff erences, and brotherhood (Franciscan order original name was »Frates Minores«; freemasons slogan – still seen for Haiti and France - is a republican principle from the masonry). Krause had a pro- found infl uence on European and Latin American education. Assisi helped 29 to restore the Catholic Church.

By the very period of the 3rd crusade, when Assisi was young, another convergent point had united in a real bioethical at- titude, composed by dialogue -despite their deadly diff erences-, three key his- torical, political and theological fi gures of the 3 monotheist religions. Kurdish Sultan Saladin (1138-1193)–Muslim-, English King Richard I the Lionheart (1157-1199)–Catholic-, and Spaniard Physician Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (1135-1204)–Jew-, all of them were also characterized by their interdisci- plinary education and their condition as important believers being involved through mesmerizing written dialogues that teach modern mankind how to solve confl icts without losing the particular essence.

Once again, limits, mu- tual recognition, eventual fi ght against violence, courtesy, respect based on di- versity and weighting of Merciful God, Love and friendship as supreme forces in Nature and Life, allowed the sake of Life. By the Treaty of Ramla (1192), the presence of the three religions in Jerusalem was guaranteed for 3 years: An order that wisely exists today in collective balanced benefi t. Franciscan friars are in charge of the Christian places in Jerusalem nowadays. Krause wanted a New World Order through a Worldwide Alliance for the Law. Messages are pertinent today in askew times.

30 Hans-Martin Sass Translational ethics: how to translate tradition into the future? References and quotes in bioethics and medical ethics are rarely older than a decade, sometimes much less. Th us, bioethics and medical ethics, being es- sentially branches of the humanities, behave like natural and medical sciences in pushing the frontiers of scientifi c research further and further by referring to most recent research. In neglecting its character and the treasures and roots of millennia of traditions in philosophy and ethics applied in the fi elds of bios and health care, biological and medical humanities miss essential issues and present shortsighted and defi cient models.

Fritz Jahr in his 20th century inter- pretation of the 5th commandment - originally given to nomadic tribes in the Palestine deserts 2500 years ago - displays a hermeneutic model, which trans- lates classical traditions into the 3rd millennium. Such a methodology can and must be applied to deepen and broaden cross-cultural communication and hermeneutics in the biological and medical humanities, also beyond the borders of specifi c cultures and traditions. 31 Marija Selak Philosophy of Karl Löwith as a precursor and incentive to the idea of integrative bioethics Traditional cosmology, once used to explain the world, was suppressed by the domination of science over philosophy which happened after their separa- tion.

Contemporary, scientifi c (in terms of natural sciences) cosmology was given the advantage in answering the question what is the world, while the »non-empirical« catholicity (the basic characteristic of traditional cosmology) became useless. Encouragement of ones eff ort to re-establish the category of catholicity can be found in the idea of integrative bioethics on one side and in the philosophy of the world on the other. In this paper the relation between the idea of integrative bioethics and the philosophy of the world will be ac- complished through philosophical discussions which were held in Augsburg and in Zagreb (1988., 1990., 1993.) and also with reliance on understanding the world in philosophy of Karl Löwith.

Karl Löwith questions philosophy of history and takes the notion of the world as a central issue of his philosophy. According to Löwith world can be comprehended only in relation with God and man, while the world history is only a manifestation of changes in that relation. In the climax of contempo- rary anthropocosmological stage and precisely in men’s encounter with himself in the fi eld of medicine bioethics appears and rises as a representation of a natural return of the category of catholicity. While in the framework of phi- losophy of the world we start from the notion of the world and by deduction come to the man as his integral part, in the framework of bioethics, which through integrative understanding widens its horizon from man (medical eth- ics), form bios to cosmos, by induction we come to the notion of the world.

32 Ivana Zagorac St. Francis of Asissi: bioethics in European Middle Ages St. Francis of Asissi (1181/2–1226) was an extraordinary fi gure of the Middle Ages. One of the most lovable Christian saints, and contemporary saint patron of ecology, has off ered a unique interpretation of interrelation be- tween God, Man, and Nature. Th e philosophical concept of St. Francis holds no place for hierarchy of beings or a dualism of any kind, not even the one between living and non-living parts of the nature. Egalitarianism of that kind necessary implies acknowledgment of intrinsic value that each and every part of the nature has, as opposite to the well-established way of value attributing in accordance to the standards of human needs.

St. Francis of Asissi is widen- ing the term ‘community’ from the community based on the shared religion beliefs, beyond the community of all living creatures, to the community of all creations. Th e intensity, with which St. Francis has lived his universal love, together with his charismatic fi gure, made him an archetype of lived sensibil- ity towards the nature. Th e same implies that he could be declared as the one, maybe even the fi rst one, forerunner of the European bioethics. Address book 35 Christan Byk Secretary general - International association, law, ethics and science 19 rue CARPEAUX, 75018 Paris France christian.byk@aliceadsl.fr Ante Čović University of Zagreb Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Department of Philosophy I.

Lucica 3, 10 000 Zagreb Croatia ante.covic1@zg.t-com.hr Eve-Marie Engels Eberhard Karls University - Tübingen Department of Ethics in Biosciences Faculty of Biology Wilhelmstraße 19, 72076 Tübingen Germany eve-marie.engels@uni- tuebingen.de Igor Eterović University of Rijeka Faculty of Medicine Department of Social Sciences and Medical Humanities B. Branchetta 20, 51 000 Rijeka Croatia igor.eterovic@medri.hr José Roberto Goldim Pontifícial Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul Faculty of Medicine Clinical Hospital of Porto Alegre Bioethics Division Rua Ramiro Barcelos 2350, 90035- 903 Porto Alegre Brazil jgoldim@hcpa.ufrgs.br Nada Gosić University of Rijeka Faculty of Medicine Department of Social Sciences and Medical Humanities B.

Branchetta 20, 51 000 Rijeka Croatia ngosic@medri.hr Hrvoje Jurić University of Zagreb Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Department of Philosophy I. Lucica 3, 10 000 Zagreb Croatia hjuric@yahoo.com Fernando Lolas Stepke University of Chile Interdisciplinary Centre of Studies in Bioethics Diagonal Paragguay 265 - Ofi cina 808, Santiago de Chile Chile fl olas@u.uchile.cl 36 Eleni Kalokairinou University of Cyprus Faculty of Letters Department of Classics and Philosophy P.O. Box 20537, 1678 Nicosia Cyprus gpeleni@ucy.ac.cy Natacha Salome Lima University of Buenos Aires (UBA) Institute of Psychological Research - Department of Psychology, Ethics and Human Rights Independencia Avenue 3065, C1225AAM Buenos Aires City Argentina nlima@psi.uba.ar Amir Muzur University of Rijeka Faculty of Medicine Department of Social Sciences and Medical Humanities B.

Branchetta 20, 51 000 Rijeka Croatia amir.muzur@medri.hr Iva Rinčić University of Rijeka Faculty of Medicine Department of Social Sciences and Medical Humanities B. Branchetta 20, 51 000 Rijeka Croatia irincici@medri.hr Ricardo Andrés Roa-Castellanos Institut of Bioethics Pontifi cia Universidad Javeriana Bogota, Colombia r.roa@javeriana.edu.co roacastellanos@gmail.com Hans-Martin Sass Georgetown University Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Healy Hall, 4th Floor , 20 016 Washington, D.C., USA sasshm@aol.com Marija Selak University of Zagreb Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Department of Philosophy I.

Lucica 3, 10 000 Zagreb marija.selak@gmail.com Ivana Zagorac University of Zagreb Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Department of Philosophy I. Lucica 3, 10 000 Zagreb izagorac@ff zg.hr 37 Homage and gratitude to the Sponsors: HRVATSKA ZAKLADA ZA ZNANOST (Croatian Science Foundation) KENNEDY INSTITUTE OF ETHICS, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. ZENTRUM FÜR MEDIZINISCHE ETHIK (Centre for Medical Ethics), Ruhr University, Bochum MEDICINSKI FAKULTET SVEUČILIŠTA U RIJECI (University of Rijeka - Faculty of Medicine) MILENIJ HOTELI, d.d. Opatija JADRAN – GALENSKI LABORATORIJ, d.d. Rijeka POLIKLINIKA MEDICO, Rijeka TURISTIČKA ZAJEDNICA GRADA RIJEKE (Rijeka Tourist Board) TURISTIČKA ZAJEDNICA GRADA OPATIJE (Opatija Tourist Board) TURISTIČKA ZAJEDNICA PRIMORSKO-GORANSKE ŽUPANIJE (Primorsko-Goranska County Tourist Board) GRAD KRK (Town of Krk)