Prošireno jastvo i identitet kroz vrijeme

In this paper, we discuss the Extended Self Hypothesis proposed by Andy Clark and David Chalmers, and address the objection that the extended self lacks stability and continuity needed to be considered identical over time. We try to show that such an objection is untenable. We also discuss the view according to which another type of self, i.e., the narrative self, can also be seen as extended, and argue that stability and continuity of this type of self is also not threatened by its extension beyond the boundaries of person’s body. Hence, at least as far as these types of self are concerned, there is no need to confine ourselves to the internalized self when thinking about the problems of personal identity.U ovom članku raspravljamo o hipotezi proširenog jastva Andyja Clarka i Davida Chalmersa, a osobito o prigovoru prema kojemu proširenom jastvu nedostaje stabilnost i kontinuitet koji su potrebni da bismo ga smatrali identičnim kroz vrijeme. Pokušavamo pokazati da je taj prigovor neodrživ. Raspravljamo i o gledištu prema kojemu se drugi tip jastva, to jest narativno jastvo, također može shvatiti kao prošireno, i tvrdimo da stabilnost i kontinuitet toga tipa jastva također nisu ugroženi ako ga proširimo izvan granica čovjekova tijela. Stoga, barem što se tiče tih tipova jastva, kada razmišljamo o problemima osobnog identiteta, nije potrebno ograničiti se na internalizirano jastvo

Science – praeambula fidei

Enciklika Fides et ratio, oslonjena na tomističku filozofsku misao, propituje odnos vjere i razuma i ističe nužnost filozofije za specifične teološke discipline. No, misaoni dosezi enciklike sežu puno dalje. Cilj je ovoga rada pokazati da se sve znanosti mogu shvatiti kao praeambula fidei i da je enciklika u cjelini poziv na dijalog, ne samo između filozofije i teologije, već i s drugim znanostima. U tom se smislu, enciklika pokazuje važnom za današnje doba, tzv. STEM doba, jer otkriva važnost svih znanosti i smješta ih u širi kontekst, te ih, ističući autonomiju njihova traganja za istinom, pokazuje neizostavnim sudionicima dijaloga s teologijom i filozofijom.The encyclical Fides et ratio is based on Thomistic philosophical thought. It questions the relationship between faith and reason and emphasizes the necessity of philosophy for specific theological disciplines. However, in this research we show that the encyclical’s thinking reaches far beyond. The analysis of the text of chapter six has shown that the encyclical emphasizes that (1) faith cannot give up reason, which limits itself from fideism. Also (2) that reason by faith strengthens itself to reach the goals it could not achieve, which represents (a) moving away from rationalism and scientism, and (b) giving reason a dimension of openness to the divine nature, revealing it as a link between nature and the divine nature. However, on the line of Thomistic thought the encyclical adds (1) that there are some truths that can be learned naturally, on the independent path of rational inquiry that does not have to divert from one’s own principles and autonomy, and that (2) the knowledge of these truths necessarily precedes the acceptance of God’s revelation. These truths represent the path of preparation for faith. Furthermore, relying on Aquinas’s metaphysic, psychology and philosophy of mind, the encyclical stresses that grace perfects nature (FR, no. 75) and that there is distinction between two lines of cognition (FR, no. 54). But these two lines of cognition are not mutually exclusive, but complementary and revealing (a) that the search for a natural foundation of meaning is one of the most important points of this encyclical and (b) the necessity of a dialogue between theology and philosophy. However, among the autonomous natural paths of cognition, which are defined by the term »the path of preparation for the faith«, which refers to the medieval term »praeambula fidei« (FR, no. 67), we also recognize the sciences that aim at natural cognition. Thus, the reach of the encyclical is expanded. Therefore, we conclude that the encyclical Fides et ratio places all sciences (a) in a broader context, and points to their significance; and (b) emphasizes their autonomy in the search for truth; and (c) at the same time reveals them as needed participants in the dialogue with theology and philosophy. Every science with its autonomy is an antecedent to the faith and that fact is a call for dialogue, which is clearly defined in Gaudium et spes number 36. This dialogue should be realized on an ontological, epistemological and ethical level. The connection in dialogue between theology and other sciences is philosophy. This, however, stead Lambert, sets before us the task of designing higher education institutions which can be a space for dialogue between sciences, without abandoning the principles of one’s own path of inquiry. By recognizing the empirical sciences as a pathway to faith and pointing out the importance of dialogue of philosophy, theology and other sciences, we discover the depth of the encyclical Fides et ratio. On its pages, it offers solutions that bring meaning and hope to the present-day STEM mentality

PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EMPIRICAL FUNDATIONS OF CONTEMPORARY COSMOLOG

Suvremena kozmologija trenutno je jedno od najdinamičnijih i najzanimljivijih područja znanstvenog interesa koje se uglavnom poistovjećuje s fizikalnom kozmologijom. Temeljno pitanje ovoga rada, bitno i za znanost općenito, glasi: može li se na pitanja kozmosa odgovoriti tzv. čisto empirijskim putem ili se suvremena kozmologija ipak mora shvatiti šire? Odgovor na to pitanje tražimo na tri razine. Prvo, uvidom u povijesni razvitak kozmologije, s naglaskom na iskustvene temelje kozmologije, istražujemo narav odnosa filozofije i kozmologije i dublje promjene, tzv. migracije pojmova i transformacije pitanja, te dolazimo do zaključka da se komplementarnim pristupom može ponuditi barem potpuniji odgovor na pitanje kozmosa i da je filozofija potrebna kozmologiji u logičkom, epistemološkom i metafizičkom smislu. Drugo, analizom temelja suvremene kozmologije, tj. standardnoga kozmološkog modela (kozmološki princip, teorija relativnosti, potvrda širenja univerzuma, nukleosinteza velikoga praska i kozmičko mikrovalno pozadinsko zračenje) otkrivamo da su empirijske spoznaje o svemiru važne i brojne, ali da nisu posve cjelovite. To pak upućuje na tehnička i fundamentalna ograničenja suvremene kozmologije koja otvaraju niz znanstvenih i filozofijskih pitanja te vode do zaključka kako je, želimo li se barem približiti cjelovitom odgovoru na pitanje kozmosa, potrebno izgraditi obuhvatniju kozmologiju koja bi uključivala i fiziku i filozofiju, što izravno upućuje na potrebu promišljanja načina funkcioniranja znanosti i tzv. statusa teorijske fizike i filozofije koje su pozvane na očuvanje vlastite autonomije, ali i na komplementaran pristup pitanju kozmosa. Konačno, kao treće, analizom temeljnih obilježja suvremene kozmologije, shvaćene kao empirijske discipline, uviđamo da se suvremena kozmologija uistinu suočava s više vrsta ograničenja; ograničenja tehničke naravi (koja će u budućnosti možda moći biti prevladana i s onima koja neće), ograničenja koja proizlaze iz naravi predmeta (načelna nemogućnost eksperimentiranja s kozmosom kao cjelinom) te ograničenja koja postavlja narav modela koji predstavljaju pertinentno spoznajno sredstvo suvremene znanosti. Tako isprepletenost i neodvojivost znanosti i filozofije glede pitanja kozmosa otkrivaju nužnost komplementarnog pristupa, ali i potrebu da se suvremena kozmologija shvati šire, kao znanstveno-filozofijska disciplina.Modern cosmology is currently one of the most dynamic, most interesting, but also the most complex areas of scientific interest. Modern cosmology is today therefore most certainly an exceptionally significant scientific-philosophical discipline: most interesting, namely, because the topic of study is of interest to each and every person, from philosopher and scientist to poet and artist. We can single out several reasons for the extraordinary complexity and specificity of modern cosmology in relation to other sciences. On the one hand, modern cosmology cannot approach its subject by means of a particular method, but rather must study it on several levels, moreso than other sciences would study their subjects. However, as an empirical discipline, modern cosmology is faced with a series of so-called technical limitations, some of which it will perhaps overcome in the future, but also those which it will never be able to overcome. On the other hand, the complexity and nature of its subject - a subject which is unique and which is a subject in the sense of scientific study, rather than a physical subject in the classical sense - makes modern cosmology different from all other sciences and causes it to be in confrontation with a series of fundamental and conceptual issues. For these reasons, modern cosmology is exposed to much criticism with regard to the possibility of its becoming an empirical science. A position of this kind is surely exaggerated, but it is also an exaggeration to expect that, given the nature of its subject and the limits of its own methods - i.e. the technical and fundamental constraints it faces - modern cosmology could ever be defined as a complete, i.e. exclusively empirical, discipline. Modern cosmology has to be understood more broadly, namely, as a scientific-philosophical discipline

Confessions — Augustine’s Protreptic

Ispovijesti Aurelija Augustina iznimno su filozofijsko djelo unatoč činjenici da je to određenje često zanemareno. Uvid u strukturu i sadržaj Ispovijesti otkriva još više, da je filozofija bila trajna sastavnica Augustinova života, a stoga što ju razumije kao ljubav prema mudrosti, Augustin i čitatelja nagovara na filozofiju kako bi i on stvorio temelje za confessio te postao istinski ljubitelj Boga. Zaista, originalan je to i vrstan Augustinov odgovor na pitanje: je li Augustin filozof? U tom smislu ovaj rad propituje nekoliko međusobno povezanih aspekata i odgovara na sljedeća pitanja: Možemo li Augustina opravdano smatrati filozofom? Zašto filozofijska dimenzija Ispovijesti ostaje nezamijećena? Kolika je debljina i važnost filozofijskog sloja Ispovijesti? Kakvo je Augustinovo shvaćanja filozofije, kako se ono očituje u kontekstu Ispovijesti i na koji način ih čini Augustinovim nagovorom na filozofiju?The Confessions of Aurelius Augustine is exceptionally multi–layered, and so its philosophical dimension often goes unnoticed. However, upon immersing ourselves in the content and structure of the Confessions, we find it to be an outstanding philosophical work permeated by all manner of philosophical topics (eg. God, the soul, man, the world, happiness, love, knowledge, truth, etc.) on the metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, educational and linguistic levels. Moreover, a classification of philosophical topics and questions reveals that philosophy was an enduring component of Augustine’s life, and since he understood it to be the love of truth, Augustine appears to be exhorting the reader to philosophy in order that the reader might also devise a basis for a confessio and thus become a true philosopher, or rather a person enamoured of God. Thus, we may consider the Confessions to be Augustine’s exhortation to philosophy, but also his original answer to the question: is Augustine a philosopher? That he was a philosopher is substantiated by the fact that in his time it was held that theology presupposes philosophy and that indeed, when seen in this context, one cannot be understood without the other. Furthermore, Augustine may be regarded as a philosopher also in terms of contemporary thought. Namely, he dealt with the majority of pertinent philosophical topics using the same „method“ as do contemporary philosophers. Insight into the content and structure of the Confessions superbly affirms this conclusion. Thus we can say that the Confessions reveal the originality, topicality and significance of Augustine’s thought in regard to this ancient, but always new, quest for truth and so undoubtedly also for contemporary philosophical–theological discussion

PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EMPIRICAL FUNDATIONS OF CONTEMPORARY COSMOLOG

Suvremena kozmologija trenutno je jedno od najdinamičnijih i najzanimljivijih područja znanstvenog interesa koje se uglavnom poistovjećuje s fizikalnom kozmologijom. Temeljno pitanje ovoga rada, bitno i za znanost općenito, glasi: može li se na pitanja kozmosa odgovoriti tzv. čisto empirijskim putem ili se suvremena kozmologija ipak mora shvatiti šire? Odgovor na to pitanje tražimo na tri razine. Prvo, uvidom u povijesni razvitak kozmologije, s naglaskom na iskustvene temelje kozmologije, istražujemo narav odnosa filozofije i kozmologije i dublje promjene, tzv. migracije pojmova i transformacije pitanja, te dolazimo do zaključka da se komplementarnim pristupom može ponuditi barem potpuniji odgovor na pitanje kozmosa i da je filozofija potrebna kozmologiji u logičkom, epistemološkom i metafizičkom smislu. Drugo, analizom temelja suvremene kozmologije, tj. standardnoga kozmološkog modela (kozmološki princip, teorija relativnosti, potvrda širenja univerzuma, nukleosinteza velikoga praska i kozmičko mikrovalno pozadinsko zračenje) otkrivamo da su empirijske spoznaje o svemiru važne i brojne, ali da nisu posve cjelovite. To pak upućuje na tehnička i fundamentalna ograničenja suvremene kozmologije koja otvaraju niz znanstvenih i filozofijskih pitanja te vode do zaključka kako je, želimo li se barem približiti cjelovitom odgovoru na pitanje kozmosa, potrebno izgraditi obuhvatniju kozmologiju koja bi uključivala i fiziku i filozofiju, što izravno upućuje na potrebu promišljanja načina funkcioniranja znanosti i tzv. statusa teorijske fizike i filozofije koje su pozvane na očuvanje vlastite autonomije, ali i na komplementaran pristup pitanju kozmosa. Konačno, kao treće, analizom temeljnih obilježja suvremene kozmologije, shvaćene kao empirijske discipline, uviđamo da se suvremena kozmologija uistinu suočava s više vrsta ograničenja; ograničenja tehničke naravi (koja će u budućnosti možda moći biti prevladana i s onima koja neće), ograničenja koja proizlaze iz naravi predmeta (načelna nemogućnost eksperimentiranja s kozmosom kao cjelinom) te ograničenja koja postavlja narav modela koji predstavljaju pertinentno spoznajno sredstvo suvremene znanosti. Tako isprepletenost i neodvojivost znanosti i filozofije glede pitanja kozmosa otkrivaju nužnost komplementarnog pristupa, ali i potrebu da se suvremena kozmologija shvati šire, kao znanstveno-filozofijska disciplina.Modern cosmology is currently one of the most dynamic, most interesting, but also the most complex areas of scientific interest. Modern cosmology is today therefore most certainly an exceptionally significant scientific-philosophical discipline: most interesting, namely, because the topic of study is of interest to each and every person, from philosopher and scientist to poet and artist. We can single out several reasons for the extraordinary complexity and specificity of modern cosmology in relation to other sciences. On the one hand, modern cosmology cannot approach its subject by means of a particular method, but rather must study it on several levels, moreso than other sciences would study their subjects. However, as an empirical discipline, modern cosmology is faced with a series of so-called technical limitations, some of which it will perhaps overcome in the future, but also those which it will never be able to overcome. On the other hand, the complexity and nature of its subject - a subject which is unique and which is a subject in the sense of scientific study, rather than a physical subject in the classical sense - makes modern cosmology different from all other sciences and causes it to be in confrontation with a series of fundamental and conceptual issues. For these reasons, modern cosmology is exposed to much criticism with regard to the possibility of its becoming an empirical science. A position of this kind is surely exaggerated, but it is also an exaggeration to expect that, given the nature of its subject and the limits of its own methods - i.e. the technical and fundamental constraints it faces - modern cosmology could ever be defined as a complete, i.e. exclusively empirical, discipline. Modern cosmology has to be understood more broadly, namely, as a scientific-philosophical discipline

Nature Open to Supernatural

U kontekstu obrata u vrednovanju naravi i nadnaravi u XIII. stoljeću misao Tome Akvinskoga o naravi kao otvorenoj nadnaravi prihvaćena je kao katoličko poimanje naravi. Cilj je ovoga rada ukazati na specifičnost Akvinčeva poimanja naravi, odnosno utvrditi značenje i važnost obilježja otvorenosti u sintagmi narav otvorena nadnaravi. U tu svrhu potrebno je razumjeti obilježja grčkog poimanja physis-a, a zatim i Aristotelovo poimanje naravi i težnje (grč. orexis). Ti uvidi pomažu razumjeti na koji se način Akvinčevo poimanje težnje (lat. appetitus ili inclinatio), a posljedično i naravi same, razlikovalo od Aristotelova. Usporedbom Aristotelovih i Akvinčevih poimanja naravi i težnje utvrđeno je da je Akvinac appetitus razumio kao začetak i sastavnicu dinamičnog odnosa naravi i nadnaravi koje tvore jedinstvenu cjelinu. U toj cjelini narav nije samo izvor promjene nego je raspoloživa primiti djelovanje vanjskog uzroka, a težnja se ne očituje samo kao neki pokret i usmjerenost nego i kao otvorenost (lat. dispositio) koja otkriva kakvo biće jest i predstavlja ontološki korijen srodnosti naravi u nadnaravi.In the context of the turn in the evaluation of nature and supernature in the 13th century, the thought of Thomas Aquinas on nature as open to supernature has been accepted as the Catholic understanding of nature. The aim of this article is to point out the specificity of Aquinas’s understanding of nature, i.e., to determine the meaning and importance of the characteristic of openness in the syntagma nature open to supernature. For that purpose, it is important to understand the characteristics of the Greek understanding of physics, as well as Aristoteles’s understanding of nature and striving (Greek orexis). These insights are helpful for discerning the manner in which Aquinas’s understanding of striving (Latin appetitus or inclinatio) and, consequently, nature itself, differed from Aristoteles’s understanding. By comparing Aristoteles’ and Aquinas’s understanding of nature and striving, the author concludes that Aquinas understood appetitus as the beginning and a constituent part of the dynamic relationship between nature and supernature that make one unique whole. On that whole, nature is not only the source of change but is also open to receiving the influence of an external cause, while striving is not only manifested as a movement and directedness but also as openness (Latin dispositio) that reveals the nature of being and represents the ontological root of cognition of nature in supernature

Education and Evangelization

Cilj je ovoga rada istaknuti ulogu i značenje obrazovanja kao jednog od oblika evangelizacije. Štoviše, detaljnijim uvidom u proces obrazovanja, odnos obrazovanja i kulture, te mjesta obrazovanja u društveno-političkom kontekstu ovo istraživanje dovodi do zaključka da su obrazovanje i evangelizacija dva moćna i neodvojiva procesa oblikovanja identiteta osobe jer svaka informacija ujedno je i formacija. Stoga možemo govoriti o nužnosti zauzetog sudjelovanja Crkve u odgojno-obrazovnim procesima i njegovu kreiranju. Briga za istinu i upoznavanje čovjeka s istinom o njegovu podrijetlu, dostojanstvu, pravima i odgovornostima, Crkvu čini odgovornom za informaciju koja ima moć transformacije, tj. oblikovanja čovjekova identiteta i lica. Briga za istinu implicira brigu za informaciju, srž je procesa evangelizacije i brige za čovjeka, njegov identitet i lice i put Crkve koji ona nikada ne smije napustiti.With the insight into the process of education, in the relationship between education and culture and in the place of education in the socio-political context, this research led to the conclusion that education and evangelization are two powerful and inseparable processes of shaping human identity, because every information is at the same time formation. Therefore, it is essential for the Church to take part in educational processes and their creation. Caring for the truth and acquainting man with the truth about his origin, dignity, rights, and responsibilities, the Church is responsible for information that has the power of transformation, i.e. the formation of man’s identity and faculties. Caring for the truth implies care of information, which is the core of the process of evangelization and caring for human being, his identity and his face, and the way of the Church that Church should never abandon. Education is the fundamental charisma of the Church and a powerful form of evangelization

PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EMPIRICAL FUNDATIONS OF CONTEMPORARY COSMOLOG

Suvremena kozmologija trenutno je jedno od najdinamičnijih i najzanimljivijih područja znanstvenog interesa koje se uglavnom poistovjećuje s fizikalnom kozmologijom. Temeljno pitanje ovoga rada, bitno i za znanost općenito, glasi: može li se na pitanja kozmosa odgovoriti tzv. čisto empirijskim putem ili se suvremena kozmologija ipak mora shvatiti šire? Odgovor na to pitanje tražimo na tri razine. Prvo, uvidom u povijesni razvitak kozmologije, s naglaskom na iskustvene temelje kozmologije, istražujemo narav odnosa filozofije i kozmologije i dublje promjene, tzv. migracije pojmova i transformacije pitanja, te dolazimo do zaključka da se komplementarnim pristupom može ponuditi barem potpuniji odgovor na pitanje kozmosa i da je filozofija potrebna kozmologiji u logičkom, epistemološkom i metafizičkom smislu. Drugo, analizom temelja suvremene kozmologije, tj. standardnoga kozmološkog modela (kozmološki princip, teorija relativnosti, potvrda širenja univerzuma, nukleosinteza velikoga praska i kozmičko mikrovalno pozadinsko zračenje) otkrivamo da su empirijske spoznaje o svemiru važne i brojne, ali da nisu posve cjelovite. To pak upućuje na tehnička i fundamentalna ograničenja suvremene kozmologije koja otvaraju niz znanstvenih i filozofijskih pitanja te vode do zaključka kako je, želimo li se barem približiti cjelovitom odgovoru na pitanje kozmosa, potrebno izgraditi obuhvatniju kozmologiju koja bi uključivala i fiziku i filozofiju, što izravno upućuje na potrebu promišljanja načina funkcioniranja znanosti i tzv. statusa teorijske fizike i filozofije koje su pozvane na očuvanje vlastite autonomije, ali i na komplementaran pristup pitanju kozmosa. Konačno, kao treće, analizom temeljnih obilježja suvremene kozmologije, shvaćene kao empirijske discipline, uviđamo da se suvremena kozmologija uistinu suočava s više vrsta ograničenja; ograničenja tehničke naravi (koja će u budućnosti možda moći biti prevladana i s onima koja neće), ograničenja koja proizlaze iz naravi predmeta (načelna nemogućnost eksperimentiranja s kozmosom kao cjelinom) te ograničenja koja postavlja narav modela koji predstavljaju pertinentno spoznajno sredstvo suvremene znanosti. Tako isprepletenost i neodvojivost znanosti i filozofije glede pitanja kozmosa otkrivaju nužnost komplementarnog pristupa, ali i potrebu da se suvremena kozmologija shvati šire, kao znanstveno-filozofijska disciplina.Modern cosmology is currently one of the most dynamic, most interesting, but also the most complex areas of scientific interest. Modern cosmology is today therefore most certainly an exceptionally significant scientific-philosophical discipline: most interesting, namely, because the topic of study is of interest to each and every person, from philosopher and scientist to poet and artist. We can single out several reasons for the extraordinary complexity and specificity of modern cosmology in relation to other sciences. On the one hand, modern cosmology cannot approach its subject by means of a particular method, but rather must study it on several levels, moreso than other sciences would study their subjects. However, as an empirical discipline, modern cosmology is faced with a series of so-called technical limitations, some of which it will perhaps overcome in the future, but also those which it will never be able to overcome. On the other hand, the complexity and nature of its subject - a subject which is unique and which is a subject in the sense of scientific study, rather than a physical subject in the classical sense - makes modern cosmology different from all other sciences and causes it to be in confrontation with a series of fundamental and conceptual issues. For these reasons, modern cosmology is exposed to much criticism with regard to the possibility of its becoming an empirical science. A position of this kind is surely exaggerated, but it is also an exaggeration to expect that, given the nature of its subject and the limits of its own methods - i.e. the technical and fundamental constraints it faces - modern cosmology could ever be defined as a complete, i.e. exclusively empirical, discipline. Modern cosmology has to be understood more broadly, namely, as a scientific-philosophical discipline

Critical Thinking, Knowledge, and Mental Health

Kritičko mišljenje značajno je za svakog pojedinca i za društvo u cjelini: u kontekstu stjecanja znanja, u okvirima služenja stečenim znanjima i u vidu očuvanja mentalnog zdravlja. Time postaje razvidno da je pitanje kritičkog mišljenja složeno te da ga treba promotriti višedimenzionalno i interdisciplinarno. Stoga, ovo istraživanje (1) utvrđuje temeljna obilježja kritičkog mišljenja, odnosno govori o naravi kritičkog mišljenja. Zatim, (2) sagledava mogućnosti ili tzv. »strategije razvoja kritičkog mišljenja«, te razmatra (3) razvoj kritičkog mišljenja u kontekstu realnih aspekata čovjekova razvoja. Cilj je ovoga istraživanja konceptualno pomoći razrješenju kontroverznih pitanja glede naravi kritičkog mišljenja i njegova razvoja, a poradi poboljšanja razine stjecanja i korištenja stečenih znanja i očuvanja mentalnog zdravlja pojedinca i zajednice.Critical thinking is important for each individual and for society: in the context of gaining knowledge, using the obtained knowledge, and in the context of preserving mental health. This makes it clear that the issue of critical thinking is complex and should be viewed multi-dimensionally and interdisciplinary. Therefore, this research (1) establishes the fundamental characteristics of critical thinking, that is, it talks about the nature of critical thinking. Then, (2) it explores the possibilities or the so-called strategies for the development of critical thinking, and (3) looks at the development of critical thinking in relation to the real aspects of human development. The aim of this paper is to help conceptually resolve controversial issues that concern the nature of critical thinking and its development to, in the end, improve the level of asset and use of obtained knowledge, and to improve the preservation of the mental health of individuals and communities