Ivan Cifrić’s research while affiliated with Institute of Philosophy and other places

In order to better understand and attempt to resolve today’s pressing environmental issues, we need a deper understanding of the ethical principals that guide the decisions of involved actors. The relationship between humans and their environment, including their practical behaviour toward the living and non-living world, is guided by ethical principles which are anthropocentric or eco/bio/centric in nature. The goal of this paper is to examine the ethical foundation of Croatian citizens’ relationship toward their living environment through their perception of 1) the right of the living beings to life and 2) the motives behind human care for the living world (plants and animals). In the theoretical part of the paper, the idea of “the right of the living world to live“ is defined by three dominant theoretical approaches: (bio-logical) egalitarianism, anthropocentric exceptionalism (human domination) and the fight for survival (natural competition). Furthermore, “the motives behind human behaviour toward the living world“ are defined by four key ethical approaches: deontological ethics (duty), utilitarian ethics (usefulness), emotions (feelings) and situational ethics (circumstances). In the methodological part of the paper, the results from the empirical research conducted on the representative sample of Croatian citizens (2014, N=1000) are presented. The results reveal that most respondents prefer 1)“egalitarianism“ (animal species have the same right to life as humans) and 2)“deontological ethics“as the main motive for human behaviour toward the living world. In addition, statistically significant differences are found in relation to respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics. Finally, we offer a brief comparison of these results with those from the previous research done in 2005, 2007 and 2010 on a narrower student sample. © 2018 Institut za društvena istraživanja u Zagrebu – Institute for Social Research in Zagreb Sva prava pridržana – All rights reserved.

This edited volume brings together 12 original contributions and an editorial theoretical framing, from 14 authors of different disciplines and training. The main framework of its theoretical and empirical contributions is determined by the relationship between environmental, social and economic systems. In elucidating this relationship the theoretical and empirical insights (based on an analysis of empirical data on the attitudes and values of nationally representative samples) reflect the specific views from the ‘European semi-periphery’, both in theoretical explorations, positioning along global development and impact indices, and analyses of public opinion survey data. This is important in the context of the role of European centres of development paradigm viewed from the global perspective of common environmental limits, and its reflection in numerous societies on the semi-periphery. Theoretical contributions elucidate the understanding and significance of sustainability from global and regional perspectives, whilst empirical studies analyse attitudes among selected European populations (based primarily on 2010 ISSP Environment module survey data) and selected peripheral country case-study reports and recommendations for sustainability oriented policies.

Autori polaze od teze da je baština (heritage) zajedničko dobro (common goods) lokalne zajednice, društva i čovječanstva pa zahtijeva i zajedničku brigu. Baština obvezuje pojedinca i zajednicu na očuvanje, razumno korištenje i upravljanje. Može se govoriti o dvjema glavnim razinama - lokalnoj (nacionalnoj) i globalnoj (svjetskoj) baštini. Općenito razlikujemo prirodnu i kulturnu (stvorenu) baštinu. Postoje tipologije koje globalna zajednička dobra dijele na tri kategorije: (1) globalni prirodni sustavi (natural global commons) – primjerice klima, ozonski omotač; (2) globalni antropogeni sustavi (human-made global) – znanstvene činjenice, norme, transnacionalne strukture (npr. internet); i (3) globalni rezultati politike (global policy outcomes) – primjerice mir, stabilnost, financijska stabilnost, zdravlje, jednakost, pravda itd. Nekoć se baštinilo samo na razini lokalne zajednice, a danas globalne zajednice. S globalizacijom baštinimo i dio od drugih, a oni od nas. Baština tako postaje predmet zajedničkih interesa lokalnih zajednica, društava i međunarodne zajednice, čime nastaju i neki problemi zajedničke baštine: održanje, upravljanje, pristupačnost dobrima (korištenje). Seljačka društva kolektivno su održavala naslijeđena zajednič- ka dobra, a koristila se i upravljala njima putem tradicijskih norma, dogovora (pravilima – statutima). Globalna zajednička dobra predmet su međunarodnih interesa i odnosa pa je ključna međunarodna kooperacija (međunarodni ugovori). S obzirom na različit stupanj razvijenosti (tehnologije), globalna baština postaje sve više ograničeno dobro, predmet iskorištavanja, svačije-i-ničije dobro, što ide u korist najrazvijenijim zemljama. Za baštinu kao zajedničko dobro potrebno je vezivati načelo neisključenosti (pristupačnosti) i nerivaliteta (nekonkurencije).

Odgojem i socijalizacijom formira se odnos čovjeka prema socijalnom svijetu (društvu) i prirodnom svijetu (prirodi) koji ga okružuje. U članku se radi o percepciji prirodnog svijeta kojom se želi odgovoriti na pitanja: (1) kako ispitanici percipiraju pravo na život životinjskih vrsta u odnosu na čovjeka i (2) koji su motivi čovjekova postupanja prema prirodnom svijetu (biljkama i životinjama)? Rad analizira rezultate dvaju istraživanja (2005, N=492 i 2010, N=410) o percepciji prava živoga svijeta na život i etičnosti postupanja prema njemu. Istraživanja su provedena na prigodnim uzorcima studentske populacije na nekoliko fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Teorijski se polazi (1) od tri dimenzije odnosa prema živom svijetu i njegovim pravima: biološkog (animalnog) egalitarizma u živom svijetu, čovjekove dominacije (antropogeni ekscepcionalizam) i prirodne kompetitivnosti, tj. borbe vrsta za opstanak, (2) a u percepciji etičnosti, odnosno motiva čovjekova postupanja prema živom svijetu, od četiri etičke pozicije: dužnosti, koristi, emotivnosti i situacije (etički relativizam). Konstruiran je instrument od sedam tvrdnji sa skalom slaganja od sedam stupnjeva. Rezultati su prikupljeni grupnim anketiranjem. U obradi su primijenjene metode univarijatne (postoci), bivarijatne (Pearson korelacija, analiza varijance i t-test) i multivarijatne (faktorska analiza pod komponentnim modelom uz GK kriterij za zaustavljanje ekstrakcije faktora). Prikazat će se promjene u percepciji (2005.-2010.), faktorske strukture te usporedba varijabli sa sociodemografskim obilježjima.

Education and socialization form the relation of humans with their surrounding social (society) and natural world (nature). Th e paper examines the perception of the natural world and attempts to answer the following questions: (1) how do respondents perceive the right to life of animal species in comparison to humans, and (2) what motivates human behavior toward the natural world (plants and animals)? Th e paper analyzes the results from two research (2005, N=492 and 2010, N=410) about the perception of the rights of the living world to life and ethics in human behavior toward it. Both research were conducted on the convenient samples of students at several faculties of the University of Zagreb. An instrument consisting of seven statements with a seven-point scale was constructed. Th e results were gathered through interviews. In the analysis of data, methods of univariate (percentages), bivariate (Pearson's correlation, analysis of variance and T-test) and multivariate (principal factor analysis with Kaiser- Guttman stopping criterion) statistics were used. Changes in perception (2005-2010) will be given, as well as factorial structures and comparison with socio-demographic characteristics.

The world ethos presents a new challenge at the end of the 20 th and the beginning of the 21 st century, which, as a "project", attempts to form the postulations for the "ethos of the humankind". The empirical research (2010; N=1008) on the probabilistic sample of the adult citizens of Croatia was conducted using two instruments: the instrument on the new world order and on the respect of the values of the world ethos in Croatia. The methods of descriptive (percentages, Pearson's correlation) and multivariate statistics (factorial analysis under the GK criterion and the analysis of variance) were used in the analysis of data. The first part of the paper gives the overview of the research results on the acceptance of theses on the new world order, world and religious peace, dialogue and ethical consensus. The second part presents the perception of the respect of world ethos values in Croatia: the principle of humanity; non-violence and respect for life; justice and solidarity; honesty and tolerance; and mutual esteem and partnership. In the final part the author summarizes the results of the statistic analysis and concludes that there is a high acceptance of the postulates of a more just world order (over 80% of the respondents). At the same time, only one fifth of the respondents (on average) think that these values are respected in Croatia. The respect of these values in Croatia indicates the acceptance of the values of the world ethos and, therefore, the author concludes that the world ethos is not present enough in Croatia.

Time and space have always been the two key aspects of human existence. However, in the course of man's cultural evolution, they have been perceived differently. In pre-modern societies, natural, cyclic time was predominant as a paradigm of local communities' organization of life. In modern society, linear time and socially (culturally) structured time dominates as a paradigm of organization of life. There are three "time cultures" (Zeitkultur) regarding the role of time in the society: "traditional", "modern" and "the culture of digitalised time". The article starts with the hypothesis that there are significant differences between natural and social systems; therefore, there are also differences in their time perspective as seen in natural (cyclic) and cultural (linear) perception of time. The confrontation of the two in modern society has its consequences. Socio-ecological crisis is the consequence of the cyclic - linear time clash; in time and space, in individuals and society as a whole, it reflects the neglect of the natural time and the dominance of the social time. The article compares the natural and the social system; it explains why time has become a relevant sociological problem in modern society, time as individual and economic resource, the importance of time economy and time management in the organization of modern life. The article points out the necessity to create a "new time culture". For that, the criticism of time economy is not enough; time ecology needs to be considered. Key words: cyclic time, time economy, time culture, linear time, time management, sociology of time.

Prostor i vrijeme oduvijek su bili dvije ključne dimenzije čovjekove egzistencije, ali se tijekom čovjekove kulturne evolucije različito percipiraju. U predmodernim društvima dominiralo je prirodno, ciklično vrijeme kao paradigma organizacije života lokalnih zajednica. U modernom društvu dominira linearno shvaćanje vremena i socijalno (kulturno) konstruirano vrijeme kao paradigma organizacije života. Glede uloge vremena u društvu, razlikuju se tri “kulture vremena” (Zeitkultur): “tradicionalna”, “moderna” i “kultura digitaliziranog vremena”. U članku se polazi od teze da postoje značajne razlike između prirodnih i socijalnih sustava, pa tako i razlike u njihovoj perspektivi vremena, vidljive u dvama poredcima vremena: prirodnom (cikličnom) i kulturnom (linearnom). Njihova konfrontacija u modernom društvu ima različite posljedice. Socijalnoekološka kriza posljedica je sudara cikličnog i linearnog vremena, tj. prostorni je i vremenski odraz neuvažavanja prirodnog vremena i dominacije socijalnog vremena s individualnim i socijalnim posljedicama. Glede toga, u članku se uspoređuju obilježja prirodnog i socijalnog sustava ; objašnjava se zašto je vrijeme postalo relevantan sociološki problem u modernom društvu, vrijeme kao individualni i ekonomski resurs, te njegova važnost za ekonomiju vremena i menadžment vremena u organizaciji života modernog društva. Ističe se potreba oblikovanja “nove kulture vremena”. Za nju nije dostatna kritika ekonomije vremena, nego su potrebna razmišljanja ekologije vremena.