Project

Human Being and Solidarity

Goal: The question of Human being is no longer merely a speculative question but one with tangible consequences. The main goal of this project is to investigate the relation between human being and the idea of ordo amoris/solidarity. It seems important to open a new debate on this topic for many reasons: The first one is that the development of new policies regarding the normative elaboration in the European context concerning the praxis of solidarity needs a critical assessment. Scheler’s thoughts on solidarity will be investigated in its ethical and anthropological implications. This kind of analysis remains, in many aspects, largely undiscovered and it needs to be re-considered with the support of unpublished materials, with a new and more accurate evaluation, with the support of an international network of scholars across Europe. In his major works, Scheler focuses on human feelings and considers love to be the essence of human nature. Scheler’s argument opens up a broad horizon of possible interpretations regarding the meaning of being human. This research project is centered on Scheler’s understanding of the relation between human being and the idea of ordo amoris(solidarity), which means the comprehension of the human being as a living ontological structure of recognition of oneself and others that binds them to a total love and expresses a mutual reciprocity.
The first part of the project will investigate Scheler’s anthropology, who (with E. Stein) can be considered the most important researcher of the 19th century on the theme of the formation of the human being and the making of solidarity. Scheler will be compared with the most notable similar or critical approaches, i.d. to Plessner, Blondel, Capograssi, to the reflection of Stein, Husserl, Lipps, Rosenzweig, Ricoeur, et alii.
The second part will benefit from the interactions of the previous one and focus itself on some of the emerging theoretical questions and their impact on social sciences. It will be dedicated to compare, integrate and further develop the results previously acquired. For instance, we will take into consideration and discuss (Salento unit) the point of view of M. Fortes about the pivotal role of solidarity and amity in the domain of familial and kinship relations. Scheler’s point of view will be also compared to the growing awareness of Scheler’s alterity’s phenomenology as a viable alternative to the crisis of the theory-theory and the simulation theory (D. Zahavi, S. Gallagher). Furthermore, in the German context, Scheler will be compared to the standpoint of a well-known scholar such as Schockenhoff (Vice-President of the National Ethics Council of the German government), who asserts that Scheler represents an answer to the problems “posed by the historical-cultural relativity of our moral ideas”. Moreover, we will critically discuss (Trento Unit) the idea of ordo amoris and emotional turn (both remarkably influenced by Scheler) in the concept of legal experience.

Date: 30 October 2015

Updates
0 new
14
Recommendations
0 new
44
Followers
0 new
51
Reads
0 new
718

Project log

Antonio Russo
added a research item
Antonio Russo
added 2 research items
Henri de Lubac, Les premiers écrits (The First Writings)
Henri de Lubac, The Years of Formation
Antonio Russo
added 2 research items
Antonio Russo, Henri de Lubac, Paris 1997, Introduction and 1 chap.
The Introduction of my book, Henri de Lubac, Paris, Brepols 1997
Antonio Russo
added an update
Scheler’s Phenomenology and Medical Humanities
The Campus Bio-Medico unit will study Scheler’s phenomenological attitude applied to clinical reasoning compared to the W. Osler’s thought: starting from the idea of phenomenological attitude in Scheler’s work, we will argue that reductionism has lost its appeal also in medicine, the medical object, that is “man”, can no longer be studied and understood only from a biological perspective.
Scheler’s phenomenology acknowledges the relationship between scientific knowledge of nature, which is mediated, and ordinary knowledge of nature, which is immediate, as a possible bridge across the dualistic gap between science and life. For this reason, a phenomenological attitude can be useful among the bio-medical disciplines where the biological object because of its very nature needs to be studied and observed not only from a mechanical perspective, but also from the perspective of teleological knowledge, which William Osler define as “clinical”.
Therefore, it is important to follow Scheler’s suggestion and recognize in biological data the beginning of a phenomenology which is not limited to the mere objective presence of the phenomenon, but which recognizes its multidimensional nature.
Scheler’s phenomenology, specifically focused on life and its manifestations, can be an interesting and useful tool of investigation in medicine where the need for a different rational style, which is not only evidence based, is growing stronger. Every step of clinical reasoning, from observation, to diagnostic hypothesis, to hypothesis verification, to decision making and follow-up would benefit from the application of Scheler’s phenomenological attitude.
 
Antonio Russo
added an update
Dear colleagues
new researches in the project Human Being and Solidarity has been added. If you wish and are interested in you can have a look
Many thanks for your attention
Antonio Russo
 
Antonio Russo
added 8 research items
Per poter comprendere adeguatamente le posizioni da Küng via via assunte nel corso della sua ampia produzione, occorre rifarsi al momento genetico del suo pensiero. Egli stesso, nel ripercorrere a ritroso il proprio cammino, ha ripetutamente avvertito la necessità di un simile modo di procedere, al punto da ammettere di essere stato «senza ombra di dubbio plasmato e in maniera duratura [...] dai sette anni romani». In particolare, lo studio delle ope- re di Karl Barth gli ha dischiuso non soltanto «l’accesso alla teologia evangelica», ma gli ha anche chiarito «cosa possa essere la teologia come scienza», fornendogli «dei criteri permanenti» per orientarsi «nella prassi e nel pensiero teologico»
Walter Kasper, 2018 In 1964, the young Walter Kasper (born in 1933) was granted by the Faculty of Catholic Theology at Tübingen the licence to teach dogmatic theology on the basis of a thesis on Philosophie und Theologie der Geschichte in der Spätphilosophie Schellings (Philosophy and Theology of History in Schelling's Late Philosophy). Kasper's interest in Schelling, himself a student at the Evangelisches Stift at Tübingen, thus originated in the context of his university studies in the school of J.R. Geiselmann and developed in parallel with his theological education. For this reason, it is impossible to form a correct idea of Kasper and his whole theology unless one is willing to take into account this background, not least because he himself has always consciously and forcefully recognised this fact and seen in it his own centre of gravity. Kasper's work and thought were shaped in a lasting manner during his university years. In fact, his entire academic oeuvre has been nurtured from this fecund origin so much so that he became one of the most well known names associated with the Catholic school at Tübingen to which he gave a new, creative impulse having himself been profoundly inspired by it. 'He always emphasised his own roots not only as a teacher of theology and a member of the teaching faculty of this Institution, but also as Bishop' and cardinal. The principal intention of the present article is precisely this: to return to this beginning and elucidate these decisive years for Kasper in broad outline by way of a Relecture and interpretation of his book on The Absolute in History and the particular manner in which he interpreted the so­called second Schelling, an author whom he approached in the wake of Walter Schulz and at practically the same time as Xavier Tilliette. The analysis will subsequently move on into the more properly theological field.
Antonio Russo
added an update
Antonio Russo, Intervento al
Convegno Internazionale su Xavier Tilliette S.J.
Con la partecipazione di Sergio Givone, Peter Henrici, Armando Rigobello, Jean-Louis Vieillard-Baron, Maurizio Pagano, Fulvio Longato
Le inquietudini del pensiero, le cose della vita e il cristiano 1 Dicembre 2011
 
Antonio Russo
added a research item
This certificate is awarded to Antonio Russo As an acknowledgement his/her association with International Journal of Social and Scientific Research (IJSSR) as Reviewer, External Advisory board member (Domestic / International) and Acquisition Editorial Member For the period from 1 June 2019 to 30 May 2020
Antonio Russo
added an update
Research project 2014
Proposal: Interdisciplinary Research Project on Human Being
Host institution: University of Trieste (Italy)
The University of Trieste will act as the central host institution of the research project and will accordingly be responsible for providing the services and facilities necessary for its development. Its activities are nevertheless open to a large number of scholars and academics and research institutions for collaboration.
The University is exceptionally well placed to invstigate further and in depth the research topics of the research project on human being.A crossroads between the Central-European and the Mediterranean cultures, Trieste has always been a pole of attraction. Among its features, besides its geographic position a fundamental role is played by its historical and cultural background with the high technical and professional skills of its citizens which found their best expression in the ship-building industry.
Trieste is also the capital of Friuli - Venezia Giulia, a region with a special statute, bordering with Austria and Slovenia and a member of the CEI (Central- European Initiative). At the time of its full splendor - as a port and trading centre of vital importance for the economy of the Habsburg empire - many factors contributed to conferring its typical character to the city, so cherished by the most eminent names in international culture such as James Joyce, Sigmund Freud, Rainer Maria Rilke, Johann Winckelmann, not to mention Umberto Saba, Scipio Slataper, Italo Svevo, Virgilio Giotti and Pierantonio Quarantotti Gambini, who were all natives of Trieste.
The University is located in the urban area that counts nearly 250.000 inhabintants. It is moreover the site of the Area Science Park (see please at:
AREA Science Park is one of the leading multi-sectorial science parks in Europe. The AREA currently has over 1600 persons in its 70 companies, centres and institutes on the park, engaged in R&D, technology transfer, training, and specialized services and of other well known international scientific institutions, such as the International Centre for Theoretical Physics. Founded in 1964 by Abdus Salam – Nobel Laureate –, the Centre operates under a tripartite agreement among the Italian Government and two United Nations Agencies, UNESCO and IAEA. Its mission is to foster advanced studies and research, especially in developing countries. While the name of the Centre reflects its beginnings, its activities today encompass most areas of physical sciences including applications.
Trieste is the centre of many others research institutions with international outstanding reputation:
with which the University is connected.
Title of the research project:
Human Being. World Openness and Openness of Human Development. Science and Religion (Philosophy) in Dialogue
Project Leader:
Antonio RUSSO
Project Co-Leader
Valter SERGO
in collaboration with:
1. Xavier Tilliette International Institute (Trieste and Florence)
2. Max Scheler Gesellschaft, Munich, Germany
3. Pontifical Atheneum of St. Anselm (Rome)
4.Pontifical Lateran University (Rome)
(Research Area Edith Stein)
5. University of Perugia
6. Pontifical Salesian University, Rome
7. University of Trento
8.University of Verona
1. Preliminary description of the project
a. Purpose and Aims of the Research Project
The project is designed with the goal of breaking down disciplinary barriers and to addressing big questions about Human being and their impact on the emerging technologies. The project is a deeper reflection of the international Conference held at the Gorizia Castle (Italy) on Human Beings: Philosophical, Theological and Scientific Perspectives, in October 2-5, 2008. See Annexes and the attached Concluding Summary of the Conference of John H. Brooke, University of Oxford, UK. In addition, the submitted research project on Human Being is a further development of a 2 years project on Nature and Intentionality, coordinated by Antonio RUSSO and funded in 2009 by the Italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research with 113.960 Euro (see under the name Antonio Russo at:
and
The project on Nature and Intentionality (or PRIN2009, Anno 2009 - Prot. 2009ZWY9HC) focused on Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition (Franz Brentano and his school, i.e. S. Freud, E. Husserl, C. Stumpf, H. Schell, H. Denifle, Th. Masaryk, etc.).The main goal of the research was to explore, and then to design an ideal map and the boundaries between two territories: the phenomenological domain and the analytic domain, to re-discover not only the same cultural background and their common cultural origins, but also the main point of contrast, the different emphasis, in which the figure of Franz Brentano is essential and the main referent, involving man's different fields of knowledge: from Cultural Anthropology to Psychology and Psychoanalysis, to phenomenologically oriented Philosophies, up to the recent perspectives of neuroethics. The main intention was to offer a new stimulus to the various and most important, continental and analytical, movements of Brentanian inspiration, not only in purely historical and philological terms, but also from a theoretical point of view.
The main results have been extensively published in German, English, French, Italian.
See, for instance:
1. Russo, Come Cornelio Fabro ha affrontato il pensiero di Franz Brentano. Con Aristotele contro il relativismo, in “Osservatore Romano” (Vatican City), May 19, 2012, p.4;
2. A. Russo, Franz Brentano and Cornelio Fabro: A Forgotten Chapter of the Brentanian Reception, in «Axiomathes«, 1 (2013), pp.1-9;
3. A. Russo, San Tommaso ed Aristotele nella formazione di Franz Brentano (1838-1917), in «Angelicum», 1 (2013), pp. 247-278;
4. A. Russo, L’idée de solidarité, in “Revue Théologique de Louvain”, 1, 2013, pp.55-81;
5. A. Russo, ed., Cornelio Fabro e Franz Brentano, Studium, Roma 2013, pp.1-260;
6. A. Russo, Franz Brentano e Heinrich Denifle (con un carteggio inedito), Studium, Roma 2014, pp.1-310;
7. A. Russo, Franz Brentano und Heinrich Denifle: Schüler des Aristoteles, in «Philosophisches Jahrbuch», 1 (2014), pp.125-151.
Today it is appropriate to speak at all of Human being as a question that in different ways has been debated since antiquity and has deeply affected Western philosophy and theology; and has been a theme of great interest, a particular focus of research both historical and contemporary, to historians and philosophers of science as well as to theologians.
A distinguished network of scholars, who have already published extensively on aspects of this debate and other scholars with a high reputation for work in the field of philosophy (science) and religion will explore the possible interdisciplinary spaces and dialogue in the outworking of evolutionary processes, offering the prospect of an extended and exciting collaboration.
The importance and the implications of the research on “Human Being” are unquestionable. The network of scholars coordinated in Trieste can offer innovation and expertise at the highest academic level on one of the key themes of the contemporary debate.
It seems important to re-open the debate for two, although not exclusively, reasons:
1. The first one is that the contemporary debate has been massively limited to an analytical point of view and that the richness and subtlety of non causalist interpretations, belonging to other traditions, have been unduly ignored.
2. The second one is that the reductionist perspective is currently facing important difficulties.
3. The idea to be worked out is that this renewed confrontation with other traditions should substantially contribute to the job.
b. Structure
The research project will organize itself into four areas, with each area concentrating on a different aspect of the same overall thematic. The entire program is directed by two principal investigators, with a high international reputation on the main aspects of this debate and shall be over-viewed by a multidisciplinary and international Advisory Board. composed of outstanding scholars, exceptionally well placed to investigate further and in depth the possible space of exchanges between the sciences and religion.
The Board shall cooperate with the project leaders for the final supervision. Their members, coming from several scientific and humanities disciplines, are there to help provide the research project with new insights and inputs and an in-depth understanding of current and emerging trends as well as a historical look at how these trends have shaped up over time, to maintain the highest standards in carrying out rigorous and impartial research. In short, the Advisory Board can offer expertise at the highest academic level on the key themes in the proposal.
Moreover, the project has an international and multidisciplinary Academic Staff that shall provide additional interdisciplinary work and support the 2 project leaders and the Advisory Board in the duties they perform for the Research: The Academic staff is composed by graduate assistants, who in their different fields are promisingly working, with particular emphasis on how religion should respond to the contemporary scientific approach.
c. Short description of the four Areas
1. First Area: World Openness
After a preliminary introduction, the initial step will consist in the attempt to set up the context of the anthropological discourse. That means: the first Area’s (World Openness) intended aim is to map out, in a systematic and critical way, The Conference will discuss the New Research Pilot Project on “Human nature: Philosophical, Theological and Scientific Perspectives”, mapping the context, the background, the latest trends and evolutions in Italy and Europe, and the delivery of headline targets at the national and international level.the latest trends, evolutions and tensions within the field that may be called the World Openness of the Human being in the contemporary debate. The ambition is to reconsider the main discussions and problems, so as to obtain a rigorous and well delineated framework, and so to offer new inputs to the contemporary debate on science (philosophy) and religion.
Modern philosophical anthropology takes its point of departure from two opposing conceptions: that attributed to Max Scheler (1874-1928) and that of Helmut Plessner (1892- 1985).
With Scheler and Plessner the anthropological discourse take into account the challenges emerging from the sciences as well as from the humanities and the religion.
According to Max Scheler, philosophical anthropology is nothing but the quintessence of philosophy itself. According to Plessner it follows the methodology and achievements of the empirical sciences of Human Being in the form of an ‘integrative’ discipline.
Scheler, who lectured in Goettingen from 1910 to 1911, where Edith Stein was one of his students, hearkens back to the traditional determination of Human Being as loving being. In his major works he criticizes the point of view of Husserl, Kant and German Idealism, focuses on human feelings and considers the love to be the essence of the nature of man, of human existence. Scheler defines the logic of love as different from the logic of pure reason, following the French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal, an author “very dear to Maurice Blondel, both as an example and an inspiration”. Starting from Pascal “Blondel was drawing out the express tendencies of Pascal’s thought in a more systematic or, as he says, a more technical way than Pascal had left his thoughts”.
Plessner refused the Christian metaphysics of Scheler and embraced the orientation of biological, medical, psychological, and, in the extended sense, social-scientific research, and he does this with the conceptual goal of a structural theory of Human being.
Common to both thinkers in the characterisation of Human Being is the concept of world-openness. According to Scheler Human Being is the “X that can behave in a world-open manner in an unlimited extent”. According to Plessner, Human being is “characterised by an ‘ex-centric positionality’, whereby his existence, that possesses no fixed centre, is described as the unity of mediated immediacy and natural artificiality. In other words, Plessner means that the nature of human beings, from the very beginning, is an artificial one, i. e. is too plastic if compared with that of other living beings and insofar its conduct needs to be fixed in an artificial way.
This opens up a broad horizon of possible interpretations of Human Being, and to this extent a broad discussion for an answer to the question what a human being is. These two different approaches, studied by the disciplines of natural sciences and cultural science with different scientific methods, will be the starting point and the crucial stimulus of the overall project.
2. Second Area: Openness of Human Development
The concept of World –Openness embraces and includes the aspect of the Openness of Human Development. And so capitalizing on the resultsThe Conference will discuss the New Research Pilot Project on “Human nature: Philosophical, Theological and Scientific Perspectives”, mapping the context, the background, the latest trends and evolutions in Italy and Europe, and the delivery of headline targets at the national and international level. of the previous research, the second Area (Openness of the Human Development) will take into account and analyze (inside and outside Philosophy and Science) the theoretical sense and importance of the openness that affects all phases of human development, both from an ontogenetic and from a phylogenetic point of view.
The central meaning or essence of the human being is “a loving act of participation by the core of the human being in the essence of all things”; and so it is an inexhaustible loving willingness to be open to the world, to that which is other, a going beyond oneself, directed to the transcendence, to the infinite. There is a deply, hidden in human being, order of love, a capacity which begins with the rank of sensible values and tends toward to the realization of an higher value and, at the end, of the value of the holy. In our technological era this point of view appears to be a pioneering work, full of suggestions. It is an attempt to save from any reductive idea of human being as tool-maker or as a mere object the core meaning and the absolute value of the human being.
This standpoint has incalculable ethical and social values. It assumes that there is a process of realization that needs and is associated at the very beginning with realizing factors: historical, economics, politicals, socials. The human being is conceived as a “member of a totality”; his experience is always an “experiencing with one other” connected to the responsibility for others, the corresponsability for community. It means that the acts of human beings are fulfilled with reference to a community, are acts of a member of a community. We belong to a community with the other, in which there is a sense of solidarity or “representable solidarity” and anyone can represents and has to take responsibility for the others.
Furthermore it is a foundation of the modern anthropology, that the current reductionist approach has largely ignored or rejected; and involves crucial aspects already well delineated and discussed in the twentieth century by several main figures (M. Blondel, Max Scheler, Edith Stein, Teilhard de Chardin, H. Jonas), who explicitly took into account the modern scientific approach and the challenges of religion, especially with regard to the place of the human being in the cosmos..
3. Third Area: Openness of the Human Development and Emerging Technologies
The Third Area will benefit from the interactions of the previous areas and focus itself on the emerging technologies and their impact on social sciences, trying to offer contributions for instance about the Emerging Technologies and Law, anthropology and future, etc. This work will be centered on some central implications and transformations currently under way in the field of contemporary social sciences.
Today, the philosophy of human openness is being given concrete shape. There are two reasons why this is so. The first is the biological science of evolution and its application to human origins. Recent discoveries, fueled by advanced analysis of archaeological remains and of archaic DNA, create an entirely new view of the complex origins of the human species. Throughout this process, technology plays a pivotal role. Advances in simple technologies led to better nutrition, nuclear families, extended childhood and adolescence, and dramatic increases in cognitive ability and cultural capacity. The second reason why human openness is taking concrete shape is because of the accelerating pace of technological advance. Today’s technologies have advanced and converged in unexpected ways, setting the stage for a whole new era in human and cosmic evolution. Through human technology, the cosmos can act upon itself in unprecedented ways. The question of human openness is no longer merely a speculative question but one with tangible consequences for the future of humanity and of the cosmos.
Some of these themes were discussed in the 1950s by Julian Huxley and Teilhard de Chardin. In the 1960s the theologian Karl Rahner reflected at length on what he called the “self-transcendence” or inherent openness of the cosmos. Human beings, Rahner suggested, stand at a distinct place. Because of science, we are uniquely conscious of the self-transcendence or openness of the cosmos. Because we have technologies that are ever more powerful, we can dare to imagine the use of technology as a means to the future of creation. Some of Rahner’s key ideas are recently echoed by popular writer Ted Chu, whose 2014 Human Purpose and Transhuman Potential also suggests that human beings are distinctly aware and equipped to play a role in the coming future of the cosmos.
As the power of technology grows, so does the urgency behind interdisciplinary dialogue on technology’s future impact. The Third Area turns to this question. It builds on previous areas, which explore the openness of the human in the context of the openness of the cosmos. Here, however, the question turns to the role of technology as a distinctly human contribution. How does technology—that of today and tomorrow—equip human beings to play a pivotal role in contributing to the cosmic future?
4. Fourth Area: Human Beings. Theological Perspectives
The fourth Area in the light of the knowledge afforded by natural/biological science and philosophy, will be dedicated to compare, integrate and further develop the results previously acquired by the other three areas of the research project. We will investigate how does the foregoing account of Human nature affect the doctrine of creation and has extremely important ethical and social implications. We will take seriously into account and discuss some of the most outstanding contemporary theologians (H. de Lubac, K. Rahner, A. Farrer, J. Zizoulas, W. Pannenberg, J. Moltmann, W. Kasper), who are highly regarded and have been very influential and developed a response to the nature of evolutionary anthropological ideas.
The signifiance of these reflections about World Openness and Openness of Human Development for the current debates on the complementarity of scientific and religious anthropological approach, is extremely suggestive and “this is why it is worth analyzing these reflections in greater details, even if one does not share the epistemological and ontological presuppositions of the philosophy of values”.
This perspective might transcend its empirical context (first half of the twentieth century) and led to a broad interdisciplinary dialogue. In other words, his importance for the dialogue “lies above all in the fact that he can take the historical relativity of our moral views just as seriously as this relativism, but without being obliged to interpret it in the sense of a fundamental equity in rank. On the contrary…shows how the historical character of the perception of values is compatible with the objective evidential character of the validity of these values…is able to integrate empirical-historical investigation into to the question posed by moral philosophy, his approach proves superior also to the sheer rejection of naturalistic moral theories by analytic ethics”. (E. Schockenhoff).
1) Outocomes
The overall ambition is to undertake a constructive collaboration between theological Universities and State Universities involved in this issue.This means that a deeper intellectual effort is needed to pave the way towards a remarkable boosting of the dialogue between science, philosophy and religion; and to meet the objective of discussing and promoting interdisciplinary exchanges on such vitally important topics as Science, Religion, Philosophy by not only leading scholars but also students and members of the general public.
Moreover, it is our intention to made all the documents and texts public and easily available to those interested, in order to organize the broadest debate around the themes discussed in the research project. The texts will be published online, and a dedicated webpage is already under construction. Part of these funds should be used for public events, advertising, publication of newsletters, printing, etc. It is appropriate to speak at all of Human being as a question that in different ways has been debated since antiquity and has deeply affected Western philosophy and theology. The challenge to their respective philosophies of nature has been a subject of great interest to historians and philosophers of science as well as to theologians.
A distinguished group of scholars has already published extensively on aspects of this debate. Other scholars with a high international reputation for work in the field of science (philosophy) and religion shall explore the possible spaces for mutual exchanges in our technological and evolutionary world-view. All that can offer the prospect of an extended and exciting collaboration. In short, the project can offer expertise at the highest academic level on one of the key themes in the contemporary discussion.
The international and interdisciplinary network of selected leading scademics, fostering the dialogue between science (philosophy) and religion, coordinated at the University of Trieste (Italy), includes scholars from across the disciplines, who have already published extensively on the main aspects of the submitted research project on Human being.
1. franzbrentano.eu/en/ with the support of the Trieste University.
We trust that consolidation of exchange with scholars of international high reputation, will continue to deepen and prove highly beneficial and rewarding academically as leading thinkers.
 
Antonio Russo
added an update
The research project, which is to be meant as an advanced step toward an European Research Project (Horizon 2020), is focused on the relation between human being and the idea of ordo amoris, a central implication currently under way in the field of contemporary philosophy, ethics and social sciences. Scheler’s starting point seems to us to be very productive. In its first stage, the project is designed to analyze the issue of formation of the human being and of making of solidarity in the anthropology of Scheler with a critical comparison with some of the authors who discussed with him ( Plessner), who continued central elements of his reflection (Edith Stein and, Levinas), or developed theoretical positions very similar to his (Maurice Blondel).
It is not at stake, here, a mere academic question , because the development of this issue may have important repercussions particularly on the issue of intercultural dialogue and the relationship between the individual and society . Such discussions, for example, are in progress in Anglo-Saxon countries, where some scholars try to use Scheler’s phenomenology of otherness as an alternative to the crisis of the so-called theory -theory (D . Zahavi and Gallagher) , but also in German cultural context, where the debate around the foundation of ethics of Human dignity in an historical world is well alive (E.Schockenhoff) and , finally, we must refer to the debate on the results and recent developments of Blondel’s social phenomenology of action (X. Tilliette , P. Henrici , J. Scannone , M. Sutton , E. Gabellieri) . Our basic intention is to adequately take into account and try to give a full answer to the importance and significance of the problem posed by the historical-cultural relativity of our moral ideas and to take seriously the problems generated by ethical relativism (especially within the Europena cultural space), on which, at the present time philosophical discussion has shown no sign of a definitive and persuasice solution.
Methodology
The following methodology of work the following methodology of work will be implemented:
1) Analysis and clarification of Scheler’s work , on the basis of his printed books , but also of his unpublished notes ( with research conducted on Scheler’s Nachlaß at the Staatsbibliothek of Munich and with the edition of some unpreviously unpublished Heidegger’s notes on Scheler ) .
So far scholarly studies on Scheler have focused mainly on the concept of value and of the person as a spiritual center and on the problem of the impotence of the spirit within philosophical anthropology.
We propose to move the on the themes of phenomenology of otherness , of emotions and empathy , following more closely the analysis carried out in Sympathiebuch .
In fact , continuing the work of editing and translation of some fundamental texts of Scheler , some highly qualified scholars involved in this research project , coordinated by the President of Max Scheler Gesellschaft ( Cologne ) , Prof. Guido Cusinato , will try to clarify the central aspects of philosophical anthropology and the formation of man as a continuous birth ( human plasticity ), to show that this plasticity corresponds to a concept of " humanism " that no longer refers to a fixed and unchanging human nature , but should be characterized in terms of a training process based on solidarity and openness to otherness .
The classical sense of humanitas as a mixed of individual virtue and public behavior , in the global era , should be reshaped around the theme of the human community that, in opur opinion, must outline a shared road-map to mitigate factors of conflict between cultures and to bebar irresponsibile predation of the Earth .
The aim is therefore to investigate how logic of solidarity and Weltoffenheit can become constitutive moments not only of the formation of human beings but also of contemporary societies.
2) The second step will benefit from the interactions of the previous research and will focus especially on E. Stein (who was one of Scheler’s students in Göttingen from 1910 to 1911). It will be centered on the idea of ordo amoris. This idea stems from Scheler, where it means the comprehension of the human being as a living ontological structure of recognition of self and others that binds to a total love and expresses a mutual giving.
In particular, we will try to seize the theoretical impact of this idea within the critical context of classical phenomenology.
We will highlight some developments and parallel phenomenological paths. In particular, the phenomenological anthropology outlined so far will be understood as an ethical approach to the theme of otherness and will be treated in connection with the discovery of the self (particularly meant as criticism of Husserl’s and Stein’s concept of empathy) and as a place of relationship and encounter / clash of the indivudal self with the other (self as another).
in this way, it is possible to find a direct approach to the theme of "sympathy", as set by Scheler, within the critical perspective in which Ricoeur seeks an ethical approach to the issue of "respect" as the original form of the relation (Sympathy and respect ) by virtue of which sympathy is called to deal with the broader issue of the struggle for recognition and of the problematic relationship between "love and justice."
3) The Third step turns to the last question and it builds on it. It will explore the openness of the human being and the idea of solidarity in the context of the phenomenology of action (Blondel). Here, the question turns to the pivotal role of human being as a structural social openness. Scheler harkens back to the traditional determination of Human Being as loving being and defines the logic of love as different from the logic of pure reason, following the French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal (an author “very dear to Blondel, both as an example and an inspiration”). Starting from Pascal “Blondel was drawing out the express tendencies of Pascal’s thought in a more systematic or, as he says, a more technical way than Pascal had left his thoughts”. These themes remain largerly undiscovered and need to be re-considered using rigorous and critical research. With the access to the Nachlass and the support of the correspondence and of unpublished materials it is possible to shed new light on both authors, in order to reconstruct, not only the same cultural background, but also the boundaries between the two authors, and to give an account on the origins of the human sociability and of cooperation among individuals, thorugh the dialectic of the phenomenon of social action and of “the constitution of human sociability in the world”, which are parts of the internal disposition of human beings.
4) The fourth step aims to analyze Scheler’s idea of solidarity and its role in the structure of the new historical cultural and social configurations. The historical-critical method will be applied and an international network of researchers and institutions (Berlin, Louvain, Paris, etc.) will ensure an appropriate working team. The main target is the development of new policies for the normative elaboration in the European context concerning the praxis of solidarity, with application e.g. to migration processes. A renewed discussion about the “solidarity” seems to be necessary, since its consequences and implications in the anthropological sciences are as fundamental as underestimated today. The contribution offered by Scheler's conception of solidarity to “human development” will be here investigated in its ethical and anthropological implications and compared to the point of view of Meyer Fortes, who teaches that the domain of familial and kinship relations is neither subsumable in any other domain of social life nor reducible to extraneous determinants: it is solidarity which reestablishes this domain of familial and kinship relations. The critical feature of this domain, in fact, is a set of normative premises, focusing upon a general and fundamental axiom, namely the axiom of prescriptive altruism, i.e. the axiom of amity.
5) Subjectivity and otherness between love/solidarity and negation
The notion of amor, and that co-related of ordo amoris, is a pivotal theme in Scheler’s thought. The Chieti unit aims at exploring, in a wider context, the significance of these notions. The various forms of love and non-love, i.e. the different modalities of inter-human solidarity, will constitute the focus of the research. In close relationship with Scheler, the work of the phenomenological philosopher H. Lipps on some phenomena pertaining to human existence, with the fundamental role played by otherness, will be taken into account. Similarly, the comparison with authors such as Levinas and Rosenzweig will aim at an analysis of the ethical and social implications of the “new thinking”, which attributes a dialogical origin to human thought. Since its earlier developments, the “new thinking” criticized any anthropology of subjectivity built on a subject characterized as a mere capacity of self-identification with, or rather assimilation of, the other. Furthermore, Arendt’s significant speculation on radical evil and on the banality of evil will be reconsidered. Attention will also be drawn to the notion of good and in particular to Iris Murdoch’s concept of a “sovereign Good”, which shows some deep consonances with Scheler’s idea of ordo amoris. The phenomenology of moral experience introduced by Murdoch, in sharp contrast with Sartre, is focused on the possibility of transcending oneself as rooted in the structure of experience. Finally, all the authors and lines of reflection just recalled can be profitably proved within the setting of a phenomenology of hate (anger, grudge, fury, resentment, dissatisfaction) and of its social constitution starting from the new instruments of mass communication. Combining a wider phenomenology of the networks with the analytical method of exclusion and subjection phenomena purposed by Foucault and reclaimed for example by J. Butler, it will be possible to identify the critical points of the contemporary subversion of ordo amoris referring to the most dramatic and current emergencies.
Target and results: advancement of knowledge
Various goals and results are expected.
1) It aims, first of all, to target the clarification of the aforementioned issues from a historical and theoretical point of view.
2) We intend to examine and read, in a new way, focusing on new aspects, the production of Max Scheler and that of the authors who critically discussed with ihm (Scheler, Plessner, Stein, Blondel ..).
3) We mean, through analysis of unpublished works, correspondence and various Nachlass, to promote a critical comparison of the authors involved to verify convergences, but also the differences in the main shared issues. We hope to design an ideal map and ideal boundaries of an ideal koinè in order to deeper discover and re-consider not only our shared cultural background, but also our points of contrast and disagreement within the common European tradition.
4) We mean to offer a qualified contribution to the widely discussed question of the origins of the human sociability and solidarity and then of cooperation among individuals. In opur opinion, the dialectic of the phenomenon of social action and of “the constitution of human sociability in the world” in motion and in its ramifications, shows that it cannot “be imposed by an external authority. It it is neither the State that makes the human being initially and ultimately sociable; nor is human society conceived only as a reaction to mechanical or biological evolution amid discordant and dislocating forces”.
One of our aim is to revitalize the debate on these social issues of crucial importance. In fact, addressing these issues has the goal of highlighting how the issues of intercultural dialogue and interreligious dialogue must be rightly addressed through investments in social terms, e.g. family support and education, aimed at promoting a culture of emotional maturity and a new order of solidarity able to cope better with the logic of resentment and fear of the other. The aim is to take advantage of the potential implicit in the growing intercultural dimension of European societies. This goal is also perfectly coherent with the specific objectives of the sub-program Horizon 2020 Europe in a changing world – inclusive, innovative, reflective societies.
Advancement of knowledge
1) A result already achieved in this research, and that we strongly want to consolidate, to achieve further progress in the knowledge of authors and themes, is the fact that it is made of a synergy of qualified authors from different language areas in addition to the Italian one (Paris-Sorbonne University, Freiburg i.Br., Prague, Munich, Oxford, Moscow, etc.);
2) it is expected the editing of some important unpublished works of Heidegger and Scheler with part of the Nachlass of the authors studied
3) Research has evident traits of originality since it considers Max Scheler and the other authors (Plessner, Blondel, Stein ..) in the light of new documents and in critical dialogue on key issues such as the discourse on Human being and the idea of solidarity;
4) This enquiry may open the way for further investigations on the idea of solidarity, which, at the present, still seems to be insufficient to address the recent social phenomena related to the problem of human nature.
5) The research project will allow to clarify and set the discourse on the presence and impact (see. the case of R. Schuman) of the idea of European solidarity borrowed from both Scheler and Blondel, and more remotely by Blaise Pascal in an anti-Cartesian perspective.
 
Antonio Russo
added 6 research items
A short presentation of Henri de Lubac
Antonio Russo, Henri de Lubac. Biographie, traduit de l’italien par Angiolina Di Nunzio, Paris, Brepols, 1997, 281 p. C’est à suivre une des figures marquantes du catholicisme français contemporain et, avec elle, à traverser un siècle de querelles et de débats dans l’Église que nous invite le livre d’A. Russo, biographie intellectuelle du jésuite H. de Lubac (1896-1991), depuis ses années de formation en Angleterre (la Compagnie de Jésus, comme les autres Ordres religieux, est contrainte à l’exil depuis les premières années du siècle), dans le contexte du modernisme et de sa condamnation, jusqu’au cardinalat qui n’efface pas les déceptions qui ont suivi le Concile Vatican II. Entre les deux, des années d’enseignement à Lyon et de recherches qui, sous une diversité apparente et un éclatement dû aux circonstances qui en font parfois des « théologies d’occasion », s’organisent néanmoins autour d’un fil conducteur unique, l’insertion du message chrétien dans le monde, ce qui se développe sur plusieurs axes : celui de l’Église et des « aspects sociaux du dogme » (Catholicisme, 1938), celui du rapport entre nature et surnaturel (Surnaturel, 1946 ; Augustinisme et théologie moderne et Le Mystère du surnaturel, 1965), qui pose la question des relations entre dogme et histoire, la remise en avant des formes de la théologie antérieures à la scolastique (dont témoignent la création des Sources chrétiennes et les travaux sur Origène, 1950, puis sur l’Exégèse médiévale, 1959-1964) mais aussi entraîne les controverses autour de l’ « école de théologie de Lyon » et la « nouvelle théologie », ainsi que la mise à l’écart de de Lubac à la suite de l’encyclique Humani generis de Pie XII en 1950, celui encore de la connaissance de Dieu et de l’athéisme (Le drame de l’humanisme athée, 1944 ; De la connaissance de Dieu, 1945 ; Aspects du bouddhisme, 1951, etc.). C’est ce même fil rouge qui engage de de Lubac dans la résistance spirituelle au nazisme et à l’antisémitisme et la participation active aux Cahiers du témoignage chrétien (1941-1944). C’est donc cette œuvre très riche qui est ici présentée, enracinée dans un réseau complexe où se croisent des figures amies (A. Valensin et, à travers lui, M. Blondel qui a une grande influence sur sa pensée, Y. de Montcheuil, P. Teilhard de Chardin, G. Fessard, J. Monchanin, etc.) et d’autres qui ne le sont pas (R. Garrigou-Lagrange, etc.). Philippe NOUZILLE. http://www.cairn.info/revue-les-etudes-philosophiques-2001-4-page-557.htm
Antonio Russo
added an update
The project is a deeper reflection of the Int. Conference held at the Gorizia Castle on Human Beings, October 2-5, 2008 org. by A.Russo (with Sir A.Kenny, J.Brooke, R.Cole-Turner,M.Sunic, J.-L.Vieillard-Baron, P.Hodgson, etc.). Furthermore it is intended to be an advanced step toward an European Research Project (Horizon 2020). Today, the question of Human being is no longer merely a speculative question but one with tangible consequences, that at present shows no sign of a definitive solution. The submitted project is centered on the relation between human being and the idea of ordo amoris, a central theme of the debate on Human Being currently under way in the field of contemporary philosophy, ethics and social sciences. It seems important to open a new debate on this topic for many reasons: The first one is that in the contemporary debate the richness of non causalist interpretations, belonging to other traditions, have been unduly ignored. On this theme Scheler’s starting point is very important and seems us to be very helpul.The first part of the project will be the investigation of Scheler's anthropology, considered in his context and compared to the phenomenology of Action (Pascal, Blondel), to the reflection of Stein, Plessner, etc. in order to design an ideal koinè and to discover not only their commun cultural origins, but also their points of contrast.The main goal is to give an account on the origins of the human sociability and then of cooperation among individuals, the constitution of human sociability, starting from the internal disposition of human beings. This comparison remains largerly undiscovered and needs to be re-considered with the support of unpublished materials. The second part turns to the first and will builds on it, analyzing the openness of the human being and the idea of solidarity in the context of the new cultural and social configurations. An international network of distinguished scholars(Berlin, Louvain, Paris, Oxford) will ensure an appropriate support. The main target is the development of new policies for the normative elaboration in the European context concerning the praxis of solidarity, with application e.g. to migration processes. A renewed discussion about the solidarity seems to be necessary, since its consequences in the anthropological sciences are as fundamental as underestimated today. The contribution offered by Scheler's conception will be here investigated in its ethical and anthropological implications and compared, for instance, to the point of view of Meyer Fortes, who teaches that the domain of familial and kinship relations is neither subsumable in any other domain of social life nor reducible to extraneous determinants: it is solidarity which reestablishes this domain of familial and kinship relations. The critical feature of this domain is a set of normative premises, focusing upon a general and fundamental axiom, namely the axiom of prescriptive altruism, i.e. the axiom of amity.
 
Antonio Russo
added a research item
In 1964, the young Walter Kasper (born in 1933) was granted by the Faculty of Catholic Theology at Tübingen the licence to teach dogmatic theology on the basis of a thesis on Philosophie und Theologie der Geschichte in der Spätphilosophie Schellings (Philosophy and Theology of History in Schelling’s Late Philosophy). Kasper’s interest in Schelling, himself a student at the Evangelisches Stift at Tübingen, thus originated in the context of his university studies in the school of J.R. Geiselmann and developed in parallel with his theological education. For this reason, it is impossible to form a correct idea of Kasper and his whole theology unless one is willing to take into account this background, not least because he himself has always consciously and forcefully recognised this fact and seen in it his own centre of gravity. Kasper’s work and thought were shaped in a lasting manner during his university years. In fact, his entire academic oeuvre has been nurtured from this fecund origin so much so that he became one of the most well known names associated with the Catholic school at Tübingen to which he gave a new, creative impulse having himself been profoundly inspired by it. ‘He always emphasised his own roots not only as a teacher of theology and a member of the teaching faculty of this Institution, but also as Bishop’ and cardinal. The principal intention of the present article is precisely this: to return to this beginning and elucidate these decisive years for Kasper in broad outline by way of a Relecture and interpretation of his book on The Absolute in History and the particular manner in which he interpreted the so-called second Schelling, an author whom he approached in the wake of Walter Schulz and at practically the same time as Xavier Tilliette. The analysis will subsequently move on into the more properly theological field.
Antonio Russo
added an update
Father Tilliette felt and conveyed the urge of a research project capable of recognising the influence of theological data upon the philosophical work. The inspiration for and interest in such a research project took origin from Father Tilliette’s acquaintance with Father Gaston Fessard, who considered philosophy “dépendante” upon Blondel’s “première Action”. During his lectures even more than in his publications, Father Tilliette sought to develop at least fragments of that idea. He particularly endeavoured to concentrate upon the notion of philosophical Christology, which finds it best expression in a well-known formula, recently resuscitated: nemo theologus risi philosophus. That has been the focus not only of many of his books, but also conferences, conference papers, reviews, notes, various works and, more recently, books which have just published or are soon to be published.
In an attempt to establish communication between theology and philosophy, Father Tilliette started by examining the principal paths trodden in the history of modern thought to allow for a Übergang from the former term to the latter, also taking into account Lessing’s proposal on the lack of a transition. He then put forward his own “stance on the transition from theology to philosophy”, which he considered the backbone of a truly Christian philosophy. Its main features are illustrated through the analysis of three thinkers, whom he explicitly defines as closely interrelated: Maurice Blondel, Gaston Fessard e Claude Bruaire. By virtue of their intellectual paths and personal examples, they embody a faith devoted to the unavoidable search for a rational intelligence behind its own elements. They provide the best examples of how and why the intelligence should interpret solidarity between the two terms in question. Moreover, their philosophical works are among those which share the merit to have actually embarked upon and enhanced endeavours to bridge the gap between theology and philosophy.
It was especially Maurice Blondel who, through his theory on the dialectical relationships between the will and the action, the willing will and the willed will, spelt out the approach to be adopted and sets the philosophical context for the paths to be taken. His objective was to “make, as a believer, the efforts of a philosopher”, in the conviction that “faith inspires philosophy, attracts and steers its itinerary, itinerarium mentis ad Deum. Philosophy is the sanctity of reason, i.e. a rational obsequium”. Evidently, it was not the French philosopher’s ultimate intent to elaborate a sort of pure phenomenism, not even methodologically. Unlike Henry Duméry, Tilliette did not consider it an eidetic epoché, that is to say a “temporary suspension of all elements of the action while waiting for the approval of the option”. It is rather the regeneration of a philosophy not veering off into the supernatural, which is necessary but beyond one’s energies because gratuitous, but rather centred upon Christian truths as pierres d'attente or, better still, per speculum et in aenigmate.
 
Antonio Russo
added 2 research items
The main purpose of the author is to provide an accurate analysis, new considerations and debates on the most important texts published by Card. Walter Kasper on Schelling and on the Tübingen School. The intention is to offer a new approach to Kasper’s opus. The paper comprises two parts: 1) a first section about Walter Kasper and his interpretation of Schelling’s Philosophy and 2) a shorter second one dedicated to some of the most relevant theological developments of Kasper’s theology which he reached in pursuing Schelling’s questions.
On Walter Kasper. Walter Kasper tra scienza ed ecclesiologia
Antonio Russo
added 2 research items
On Italian Philosophy: Ugo Spirito and Giovanni Gentile
Antonio Russo
added 4 research items
“Il contributo di Antonio Russo, specialista di Blondel e profondo conoscitore della filosofia italiana contemporanea, per certi versi tende a riequilibrare alcuni giudizi formulati nel contributo precedente. Infatti, indagando l’influsso di Blondel non più semplicemente negli scritti di Gentile, ma allargando la prospettiva all’intero ambiente “gentiliano” si scopre una vastissima rete di conoscenze, relazioni e scambi intelettuali che si lasciavano largamente ispirare dal pensiero blondeliano. Russo attinge a una serie cospiqua di documenti inediti, tra cui alcune lettere ma soprattutto gli atti preparatori della messa all’Indice delle opere di Gentile tra il 1932 e il 1934, nei quali spicca il voto redatto da padre Agostino Gemelli, che qui per la prima volta viene parzialmente pubblicato. Vi furono poi una serie di figure che fecero indirettamente da ‘trait d’union’ tra Blondel e Gentile – basti pensare a Boutroux, a Laberthonnière o a Trippodo – e che rivelano una relazione ben più ampia e ricca di quella che emerge direttamente dai testi pubblicati” (Simone D’Agostino,Prefazione)
Antonio Russo
added 2 research items
On Stelio Zeppi (Italian Contemporary Philosophy)
Antonio Russo
added 4 research items
An article on Walter Kasper and his idea of Church
The paper aims to outline the anthropology of Henri de Lubac (1896-1991) and his idea of person by confronting de Lubac and Maurice Blondel.
Antonio Russo
added 2 research items
It is a book review on A.Russo, Henri de Lubac. Teologia e dogma nella storia, Rome 1990
Antonio Russo
added 4 project references
Antonio Russo
added an update
 
Antonio Russo
added an update
 
Antonio Russo
added a project goal
The question of Human being is no longer merely a speculative question but one with tangible consequences. The main goal of this project is to investigate the relation between human being and the idea of ordo amoris/solidarity. It seems important to open a new debate on this topic for many reasons: The first one is that the development of new policies regarding the normative elaboration in the European context concerning the praxis of solidarity needs a critical assessment. Scheler’s thoughts on solidarity will be investigated in its ethical and anthropological implications. This kind of analysis remains, in many aspects, largely undiscovered and it needs to be re-considered with the support of unpublished materials, with a new and more accurate evaluation, with the support of an international network of scholars across Europe. In his major works, Scheler focuses on human feelings and considers love to be the essence of human nature. Scheler’s argument opens up a broad horizon of possible interpretations regarding the meaning of being human. This research project is centered on Scheler’s understanding of the relation between human being and the idea of ordo amoris(solidarity), which means the comprehension of the human being as a living ontological structure of recognition of oneself and others that binds them to a total love and expresses a mutual reciprocity.
The first part of the project will investigate Scheler’s anthropology, who (with E. Stein) can be considered the most important researcher of the 19th century on the theme of the formation of the human being and the making of solidarity. Scheler will be compared with the most notable similar or critical approaches, i.d. to Plessner, Blondel, Capograssi, to the reflection of Stein, Husserl, Lipps, Rosenzweig, Ricoeur, et alii.
The second part will benefit from the interactions of the previous one and focus itself on some of the emerging theoretical questions and their impact on social sciences. It will be dedicated to compare, integrate and further develop the results previously acquired. For instance, we will take into consideration and discuss (Salento unit) the point of view of M. Fortes about the pivotal role of solidarity and amity in the domain of familial and kinship relations. Scheler’s point of view will be also compared to the growing awareness of Scheler’s alterity’s phenomenology as a viable alternative to the crisis of the theory-theory and the simulation theory (D. Zahavi, S. Gallagher). Furthermore, in the German context, Scheler will be compared to the standpoint of a well-known scholar such as Schockenhoff (Vice-President of the National Ethics Council of the German government), who asserts that Scheler represents an answer to the problems “posed by the historical-cultural relativity of our moral ideas”. Moreover, we will critically discuss (Trento Unit) the idea of ordo amoris and emotional turn (both remarkably influenced by Scheler) in the concept of legal experience.