ŚLĄSKIE STUDIA HISTORYCZNO-TEOLOGICZNE

Selected concepts for conquerring ecological crisis. Summary
Burdening a human with responsibility for the observed ecological crisis cannot cover the entire domain of questions concerning his role in nature. This is because a human is naturally able to correct his faults and negligence. As a unique creature, a human is able to enrich his relation with natural environment with a sense of being responsible for this environment. The latter is, however, possible provided human is able to recognize and appreciate his own rational and moral capability. Thanks to that, a human may also recognize his own limitations and consequently, try to compensate them rationally and morally. Three proposals for an outlook on a human as a warranty for conquering ecological crisis are presented in the article: these are the concepts of Hans Jonas, Ludwik Schäfer and Konrad Lorenz.

TOWARDS ECOLOGICAL ETHICS
This work concerns the most pressing - except war - danger for the world and mankind: the ecological disaster. The present author tries to define a theological and moral standpoint of the Church to this question, as seen in the light of such ecclesiastical papers as Constitution "Gaudium et Spes", the document of the Third Synod of Bishops "Justice in The World", The Apostolical Letter "Octogesima Adveniens", Pope Paul's VI message to The Stockholm Conference for Protection of Natural Environment and others. It is the mankind's duty not only to avoid spoiling of the natural environment, but to shape it properly as well. This duty is a moral one and pertains to the problems of moral philosophy. Assuming that, author of this work presents us subsequently some principles of a kind of environmental ethics ("eco-ethics"), the aim of which is to indicate, what should man do to protect the natural environment, and to say why should he do so. As the main source of threats for the natural environment Rev. Jan Grzesica considers the mentality of the contemporary man, his egoism and selfishness, his false hierarchy of values, according to which material goods are the most important - in spite of the order established by God, who indicates us the supernatural values and and the supreme aim as matters of the utmost importance. Man has been created by God as a being consisting both of the body and the spirit and as such he then has been redeemed by Our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore it won't be enough to protect our world against an ecological disaster if we would clean the atmosphere, soil and water up and re-create the areas of silence only. First of all man must clear up himself and his mentality; he must define his place in the natural environment. Together with the man also the nature has been created by God as well and both constitute an inseparable unity, which is expecting salvation. That is why the mutual cooperation of both - the man and his environment - is necessary. God has submitted the earth to the man, but at the same time He has committed the earth to man's care. The foundation of eco-ethics is the precept of love. Our love towards God implies a deep esteem towards His work. The man's moral duty is a sort of an ecological asceticism - he should provide for his needs at the least possible consumption, trying to endeavor after an ethical, spiritual and cultural growth. The man's aim should be "to be", not "to have". A Christian, responsible for the world's shape and its future, does not stand in blind opposition to the progress, nevertheless he should stand in opposition against a blind progress. The limitations of human activity throughout the world are defined by the St. Franciscus' respect to nature. Nature is not "res nullius", but it is "res omnium". As a property of all mankind it belongs also to the future generation, because God is the Father of all people and He is the Donor of life for all of them.

DIE GEMEINSAMEN ANLIEGEN DER ÖKOLOGIE UND BIOETHIK
Die vorliegende Arbeit stellt sich als Aufgabe, das Gemeinsame von Ökologie und Bioethik vorzulegen. Dieses hängt hauptsächlich mit der Ähnlichkeit der Probleme zusammen, die der wissenschaftlichtechnische Fortschritt innerhalb der beiden Disziplinen hervorruft. So deckt beispielsweise die Geschichte von Seveso ebenso wie die der hirntoten Schwangeren von Erlangen eine ähnliche Unfähigkeit des Menschen auf, mit all seinen Möglichkeiten richtig umzugehen. Viel drastischer kommt dasselbe in der Ambivalenz des DDT einerseits und der künstlichen Befruchtung anderseits zum Ausdruck. Will der Mensch einigermassen Herr der eigenen Errungenschaften bleiben bzw. werden, hat sowohl der Ökologe wie der Bioethiker an ein Dreifaches zu denken. Erstens, dass für eine konfliktlose Anwendung des bereits vorhandenen Wissens, ein noch grösseres Wissen zu erwerben sei. Zweitens, dass die bislang verbreitete anthropozentrische Sicht der Dinge durch eine biozentrische ergänzt, doch nicht ersetzt werden soll. Und drittens, dass nach Verhaltensnormen gesucht werden muss, die zugleich allgemein akzeptierbar und in der Praxis global anwendbar sind. Im Anschluss an die dritte Forderung wird die Behauptung Vittorio Hösle's diskutiert, nach der solche Normen im Ausserreligiösen gesucht und auch gefunden werden sollen. Anhand einer Analyse seines eigenen Textes werden die Schwachstellen, sowie die Widersprüchlichkeiten solcher Bemühungen aufgezeigt. Viel einleuchtender scheint die These Hans Küng's zu sein, dass sich die Unbedingtheit und Universalität ethischer Verpflichtungen nicht ohne die Annahme einer transzendenten Autorität begründen lässt.