@article {12680,
	title = {K metodologick{\'y}m ot{\'a}zkam antropol{\'o}gie a {\quotedblbase}obrazu {\v c}loveka{\textquotedblleft} s {\quotedblbase}{\v l}udskou d{\^o}stojnos{\v t}ou{\textquotedblleft}},
	journal = {Filozofia},
	volume = {73},
	number = {8},
	year = {2018},
	pages = {660-674},
	type = {State},
	abstract = {The study deals with the genealogy of the meaning of anthropology. We encounter it first in Aristotle{\textquoteright}s negative definition of anthropology as a {\textquotedblleft}narrative about man{\textquotedblright} with features of a gossip. Second time we encounter it in Kant{\textquoteright}s dual definition of anthropology. From a pragmatic point of view he perceives it as a normative narrative about people from the position of a participant and from the perspective of the primacy of the {\textquotedblleft}life-world{\textquotedblright}. The third instance is its secular status of a human as the {\textquotedblleft}as yet undetermined animal{\textquotedblright} (Nietzsche), who is not {\textquotedblleft}just{\textquotedblright} an animal but neither is he God. The fourth instance is the status of anthropology as a practical knowledge of oneself in relation to oneself (culture) in the synthesis of knowledge of human sciences (Scheler, Gehlen, Plessner). Finally, its current self-understanding is the result of the development of the human rights agenda after 1945 with regard to {\textquotedblleft}the image of man{\textquotedblright} with {\textquotedblleft}human dignity.{\textquotedblright}},
	keywords = {Dignity, Gossip, Image of God, Image of man, Narrative about man, {\textquotedblleft}as yet undetermined animal{\textquotedblright}},
	url = {http://www.klemens.sav.sk/fiusav/doc/filozofia/2018/8/660-674.pdf},
	author = {Lohmann, Georg}
}
