Papers and presentations

Berčić, B. (2018). Are Nations Social Constructs? Nenad on Nations. In B. Borstner i S. Gartner (eds.), Thought Experiments between Nature and Society: A Festschrift for Nenad Miščević, Cambridge UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 375-386.


Berčić, B. (2016). Očuvanje nacionalnog identiteta: Pojmovna analiza Filozofija politike: Nasljeđe i perspektive. In L. Boršić, T. Jolić i P. Šegedin (eds.), Zagreb: Institut za filozofiju, 2016. pp. 75-94.

Brzović, Z. (2016). Duševne bolesti i rasprava o biološkim funkcijama (Eng. Mental illness and the debate about biological functions). In S. Prijić-Samaržija, L. Malatesti, & E. Baccarini (eds.), Moralni, politički i epistemološki odgovori na društvene devijacije. (Eng. Moral, political, and epistemological responses to antisocial deviation). Rijeka: Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, pp. 183-200.


Value of self-knowledge – PP presentation by Nenad Miscevic


 

Are nations social constructs? Nenad on Nations – paper by Boran Berčić (in English)

Abstract

At the beginning of his book Nationalism (Part II, Chapter 1. “The Concept of Nation”, pp. 17-20.) Nenad tries to offer at least a rough answer to the question What is a nation? In this chapter he contrasts objective and subjective view of nation and opts for the subjective view. According to the objective view, nation is a large group of people who share common origin, blood, language, religion, territory, and perhaps some other objective characteristics. The point of the subjective view is that objective characteristics of a nation are neither necessary nor sufficient for its existence. No matter how detailed the list of the characteristics is, and no matter how important they are, they are by themselves still not sufficient for forming a nation. What is needed is some sort of subjective element: a belief that they form a nation, or a decision to form a nation, or acceptance of a nation, or a will to form a nation. In this paper, Miščević’s view on the ontology of nations is discussed.


The preservation of national identity: a conceptual analysis  – paper by Boran Berčić (in Croatian)

Abstract:

U nas se često može čuti da je ovaj ili onaj običaj jako važan jer predstavlja dio našeg identiteta, dio onoga što mi jesmo i bez čega ne bismo bili ti koji jesmo. Pri tome se može misliti na osobu, grupu, regiju, religiju, način života ili naciju. Pored običaja argumentom se zahvaćaju i razna druga važna ili tipična svojstva grupe kojoj pripadamo, često se govori kulturi, baštini, jeziku, religiji, itd. No argument uvijek ima isti oblik. Tezu da je neki običaj dio našeg identiteta nudi se kao vrlo jak razlog za očuvanje tog običaja: ako smo ustanovili da neki običaj predstavlja dio našeg identiteta onda očuvanje tog običaja naprosto jest očuvanje našeg identiteta. Budući da se argument oslanja na uvide o očuvanju identiteta, možemo ga nazvati argument iz identiteta. U ovom radu ovaj argument sa analizira iz različitih aspekata te se zaključuje da nije valjan.


Are nations social constructs? – Handout by Boran Berčić (in Croatian)


Kakva je budućnost rata? – Power point presentation by Siniša Malešević


Identitet umjetnickog djela – Power point presentation by Iris Vidmar


The necessity of identity: Gibbard versus Kripke – Power point presentation by Marko Jurjako


National identity and family resemblance – power point presentation by Boran Berčić


Epistemological status of autobiography in philosophy – abstract by Iris Vidmar


Methodological naturalism and the identity of practical reasons – power point presentation by Marko Jurjako


Identity, humanity and bioethics: philosophical aspects of Never Let Me Go – by Iris Vidmar

Abstract:

This paper is intended as a contribution to the ongoing discussion within philosophy of film and literature regarding the extent to which film and literary works can be medium for raising philosophical concerns. It focuses on Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go and it analyzes the story with reference to its dual nature, humanistic and bioethical. The main assumption is that both, novel and film, are philosophically rich in addressing some of the most fundamental concerns about the very nature of who we are as human beings, though the conclusions one reaches on these issue might vary, given the differences between the novel and the film. Given the depiction of artificially created people, the story challenges the boundaries of our biological identity once it is liable to scientific modifications. The
paper argues that Ishiguro’s story, though not primarily intended to asking these questions, nevertheless confronts us with the need to think about philosophical aspects and implications of science that lies behind the doors of Hailsham community. The need for such an analysis is all the more pressing, given that scientific and technological achievements at our disposal today make it possible for Ishiguro’s dystopia to become our reality tomorrow.

Narrative self – power point presentation by Igor Bajšanski


Logical Positivists on the Cogito  – power point presentation by Boran Berčić