hrcak mascot   Srce   HID

Original scientific paper

ANTHROPOCENTIC AND BIOCENTRIC RESPONSIBILITY FOR LIFE

Ivan Cifrić

Fulltext: croatian, pdf (1 MB) pages 195-215 downloads: 953* cite
APA 6th Edition
Cifrić, I. (2005). Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život. Socijalna ekologija, 14 (3), 195-215. Retrieved from https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102
MLA 8th Edition
Cifrić, Ivan. "Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život." Socijalna ekologija, vol. 14, no. 3, 2005, pp. 195-215. https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102. Accessed 13 Aug. 2020.
Chicago 17th Edition
Cifrić, Ivan. "Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život." Socijalna ekologija 14, no. 3 (2005): 195-215. https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102
Harvard
Cifrić, I. (2005). 'Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život', Socijalna ekologija, 14(3), pp. 195-215. Available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102 (Accessed 13 August 2020)
Vancouver
Cifrić I. Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život. Socijalna ekologija [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2020 August 13];14(3):195-215. Available from: https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102
IEEE
I. Cifrić, "Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život", Socijalna ekologija, vol.14, no. 3, pp. 195-215, 2005. [Online]. Available: https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102. [Accessed: 13 August 2020]

Abstracts
The author starts from the hypothesis on the existence of two ways of comprehending the responsibility for life: 'only for the human life' and 'for the whole life'. They are the consequence of evaluating life and the pre-supposition of moral action. An opinion pol has been carried out (April 2005) at five faculties of the University of Zagreb, on the occasional sample of 492 respondents from the first and final year of study. Instruments for discerning diferent bioethical issues that are associated with the responsibility of humans for life have been designed. Techniques of univariant, bivariant and multivariant statistics have been applied. The majority of respondents (74%-84%) do not accept assertions on the human responsibility only for his/her life or only for the life of humans, for the life of human race and human species, and for the life of animal that are beneficial to humans. On the contrary, the majority of respondents accept the responsibility for al life, even the one that is only conceived but not yet born. On the instrument of ‘responsibility for life’ the factor analysis has established two independent factors: ‘responsibility only for human life’ – anthropocentric responsibility (F1) and ‘responsibility for al life’ – biocentric responsibility (F2), that explain 56.42% of the variance. Independency of the factors (F1 and F2) confirm the existence of two groups of respondents and also confirm the existence of two concepts of responsibility for life: anthropocentric and biocentric, that indicate the basis for two bioethic orientations: anthropocentric and biocentric ethics. ‘Responsibility only for human life’ is significantly more accepted by male/female students at the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, of the male sex, and the ‘responsibility for al life’ is more accepted by male/female students at the Theological Faculty, those of the ‘right-leaning’ political orientation and those of female sex.

Keywords
anthropocentrism; bioethics; biocentrism; eco-centrism; responsibility for life; university students

Hrčak ID: 9102

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102

[croatian] [german]

Visits: 1.993 *