The Offstage of Democracy: The Problem of Social Dialogue in John Dewey’s and Walter Lippmann’s Writings

The aim of this article is to present and discuss John Dewey’s and Walter Lippmann’s views on the problem of communication in a democratic society, particularly their views on the question of a role of communication in forming social processes. First part of the paper outlines the framework of this problem and its meaning to the question of possibility of democracy. Part two is concerned with anthropological and socio-political considerations: I discuss the Deweyan and the Lippmannian understanding of individual, society, intelligence and democracy. In part three I examine in detail the problem of communication, with special attention given to the questions of the role of communication in forming social processes, the foundations and conditions of communication, the debaters, and a subject matter of a debate as well as the questions of who and what forms this debate and whether we can form it altogether.

Filozofia antyczna wobec problemu interpretacji. Rozwój alegorezy od przedsokratyków do Arystotelesa

The present work examines the beginnings of ancient hermeneutics. More specifically, it discusses the connection between the rise of the practice of allegoresis, on the one hand, and the emergence of the first theory of figurative language, on the other. Thus, this book investigates the specific historical and cultural circumstances that enabled the ancient Greeks not only to discover the possibility of allegorical interpretation, but also to treat figurative language as a philosophical problem. By posing difficulties in understanding the enigmatic sense of various esoteric doctrines, poems, oracles and riddles, figurative language created the context for theoretical reflection on the meaning of these “messages”. Hence, ancient interpreters began to ponder over the nature and functions of figurative (“enigmatic”) language as well as over the techniques of its proper use and interpretation. Although the practice of allegorical interpretation was closely linked to the development of the whole of ancient philosophy, the present work covers only the period from the 6th to the 4th century B.C. It concentrates, then, on the philosophical and cultural consequences of allegoresis in the classical age. The main thesis advocated here has it that the ancient Greeks were in-clined to regard allegory as a cognitive problem rather than merely as a stylistic or a literary one. When searching for the hidden meanings of various esoteric doc-trines, poems, oracles and riddles, ancient interpreters of these “messages” assumed allegory to be the only tool suitable for articulating certain matters. In other words, it was their belief that the use of figurative language resulted from the necessity of expressing things that were otherwise inexpressible. The present work has been organized in the following manner. The first part contains historical and philological discussions that provide the point of departure for more philosophical considerations. This part consists of two introductory chapters. Chapter one situates the practice of allegorical interpretation at the borderline of two different traditions: the rhetorical-grammatical and the hermeneutical. In order to clearly differentiate between the two, chapter one distinguishes between allegory and allegoresis, on the one hand, and allegoresis and exegesis, on the other. While pointing to the conventionality (and even arbitrariness) of such distinctions, the chapter argues, nevertheless, for their heuristic usefulness. The remaining part of chapter one focuses on a historical and philological reconstruction of the most important conceptual tools of ancient hermeneutics. Discussing the semantics of such terms as allēgoría, hypónoia, ainigma and symbolon proves important for at least two crucial reasons. Firstly, it reveals the mutual affinity between allegoresis and divination, i.e., practices that are inherently connected with the need to discover the latent meaning of the “message” in question (whether poem or oracle). Secondly, these philological analyses bring to light the specificity of the ancient understanding of such concepts as allegory or symbol. It goes without saying that antiquity employed these terms in a manner quite disparate from modernity. Chapter one concludes with a discussion of ancient views on the cognitive value of figurative (“enigmatic”) language. Chapter two focuses on the role that allegoresis played in the process of transforming mythos into logos. It is suggested here that it was the practice of allegorical interpretation that made it possible to preserve the traditional myths as an important point of reference for the whole of ancient philosophy. Thus, chapter two argues that the existence of a clear opposition between mythos into logos in Preplatonic philosophy is highly questionable in light of the indisputable fact that the Presocratics, Sophists and Cynics were profoundly convinced about the cognitive value of mythos (this conviction was also shared by Plato and Aristotle, but their attitude towards myth was more complex). Consequently, chapter two argues that in Preplatonic philosophy, myth played a function analogous to the concepts discussed in chapter one (i.e., hidden meanings, enigmas and symbols), for in all these cases, ancient interpreters found tools for conveying issues that were otherwise difficult to convey. Chapter two concludes with a classification of various types of allegoresis. Whilst chapters one and two serve as a historical and philological introduction, the second part of this book concentrates on the close relationship between the development of allegoresis, on the one hand, and the flowering of philosophy, on the other. Thus, chapter three discusses the crucial role that allegorical interpretation came to play in Preplatonic philosophy, chapter four deals with Plato’s highly complex and ambivalent attitude to allegoresis, and chapter five has been devoted to Aristotle’s original approach to the practice of allegorical interpretation. It is evident that allegoresis was of paramount importance for the ancient thinkers, irrespective of whether they would value it positively (Preplatonic philosophers and Aristotle) or negatively (Plato). Beginning with the 6th century B.C., the ancient practice of allegorical interpretation is motivated by two distinct interests. On the one hand, the practice of allegorical interpretation reflects the more or less “conservative” attachment to the authority of the poet (whether Homer, Hesiod or Orpheus). The purpose of this apologetic allegoresis is to exonerate poetry from the charges leveled at it by the first philosophers and, though to a lesser degree, historians. Generally, these allegorists seek to save the traditional paideia that builds on the works of the poets. On the other hand, the practice of allegorical interpretation reflects also the more or less “progressive” desire to make original use of the authority of the poet (whether Homer, Hesiod or Orpheus) so as to promote a given philosophical doctrine. The objective of this instrumental allegoresis is to exculpate philosophy from the accusations brought against it by the more conservative circles. Needless to say, these allegorists significantly contribute to the process of the gradual replacing of the mythical view of the world with its more philosophical explanation. The present book suggests that it is the philosophy of Aristotle that should be regarded as a sort of acme in the development of ancient hermeneutics. The reasons for this are twofold. On the one hand, the Stagirite positively values the practice of allegoresis, rehabilitating, thus, the tradition of Preplatonic philosophy against Plato. And, on the other hand, Aristotle initiates the theoretical reflection on figurative (“enigmatic”) language. Hence, in Aristotle we encounter not only the practice of allegoresis, but also the theory of allegory (although the philosopher does not use the term allēgoría). With the situation being as it is, the significance of Aristotle’s work cannot be overestimated. First of all, the Stagirite introduces the concept of metaphor into the then philosophical considerations. From that moment onwards, the phenomenon of figurative language becomes an important philosophical issue. After Aristo-tle, the preponderance of thinkers would feel obliged to specify the rules for the appropriate use of figurative language and the techniques of its correct interpretation. Furthermore, Aristotle ascribes to metaphor (and to various other “excellent” sayings) the function of increasing and enhancing our knowledge. Thus, according to the Stagirite, figurative language is not only an ornamental device, but it can also have a significant explanatory power. Finally, Aristotle observes that figurative expressions cause words to become ambiguous. In this context, the philosopher notices that ambiguity can enrich the language of a poet, but it can also hinder a dialectical discussion. Accordingly, Aristotle is inclined to value polysemy either positively or negatively. Importantly, however, the Stagirite is perfectly aware of the fact that in natural languages ambiguity is unavoidable. This is why Aristotle initiates a syste-matic reflection on the phenomenon of ambiguity and distinguishes its various kinds. In Aristotle, ambiguity is, then, both a problem that needs to be identified and a tool that can help in elucidating intricate philosophical issues. This unique approach to ambiguity and figurative (“enigmatic”) language enabled Aristotle to formulate invaluable intuitions that still await appropriate recognition.

Koncepcja imperium w neokonserwatywnej myśli politycznej w okresie prezydentury George’a W. Busha

Wydział Nauk Politycznych i Dziennikarstwa: Zakład Stosunków Międzynarodowych

Obraz podboju kosmosu w amerykańskiej i radzieckiej literaturze i sztuce

Wydział Anglistyki

Bogusław Śliwa (1944-1989) - działacz opozycji demokratycznej i "Solidarności" w Kaliszu

Bogusław Śliwa was born in Lvov on 6 October 1944. He graduated in law studies at Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań in 1969. Following the completion of his prosecutor’s apprenticeship he worked, among others, in Wolsztyn, Świebodzin and – from 1975 – in Kalisz. On 22 August 1978 Śliwa was fired from the public prosecutor’s office because he had attempted to detect a person who murdered during the robbery committed by a Civic Militia officer. That time he established and maintained close contacts with activists of the Workers’ Defence Committee (KOR), among others: Jacek Kuroń, Mirosław Chojecki, Adam Michnik, Bronisław Geremek, Jan Lityński, Zofia Romaszewska and Zbigniew Romaszewski. In 1978 he began to cooperate with the Kalisz group of the Movement for the Defence of Human and Civil Rights (ROPCiO). In the early 1979 this group started to publish “Wolne Słowo” in which Śliwa was a co-editor. On 28 June 1979 in Poznań he was involved in founding the Social Self-Defence Club of the Wielkopolska and Kujawy Region. In September 1980, during strikes at the FWR “Runotex” and KZKS “Winiary” in Kalisz Śliwa was an expert representing the workers. On 29 September of that year, he arranged in Kalisz a meeting of representatives and delegates of enterprises in Kalisz aimed at appointing the Board of the Inter-Enterprise Founding Committee of the Independent Self-Governing Trade Union. He became the secretary. Bogusław Śliwa also engaged in setting up and developing an information team. He was informally responsible for developing an information and printing base. Bogusław Śliwa set up “NSZZ Solidarność” magazine where he published his own articles. He also founded the “Solidarność” Workers’ Community Centre in Kalisz. it is noteworthy that it was the only community centre in Poland established by „Solidarność”. In December the Nationwide Liaison Commission of „Solidarność” appointed him to the Committee for the Defence of Prisoners of Conscience established on 10 December of that year. He participated in the information meeting of the Independent Self-Governing Trade Union of Independent Farmers “Solidarność Wiejska” held in Staw, in Szczytniki commune. During that meeting “Solidarność Wiejska” led by Mieczysław Walczykiewicz requested the authorities to liquidate the “Świt” Agricultural Production Cooperative in Cieszyków, in Szczytniki commune. Bogusław Śliwa was involved in this successful event. It was the first liquidation of cooperative in Poland. On 11 January 1981 Śliwa co-organized the 1st Regional Convention of „Solidarność” Wiejska in Kalisz. Following the so-called Bydgoszcz events of 19 March 1981 he advocated the general strike. Due to his attitude, Śliwa was listed as one of 146 „Solidarność” activists executed by the 3rd “A” Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. According to the authorities those activists presented radical views. On 30 June 1981 at the 1st General Delegates Convention of the Kaliskie province, Śliwa, as a delegate of the Kaliskie province, was appointed to the Regional Board of „Solidarność” – Southern Wielkopolska. In July Śliwa set up in Kalisz the underground branch of the Polish Democratic Party. In 1981 Śliwa was a delegate to the 1st National Delegates Convention of „Solidarność” and co-edited with Jan Lityński the document entitled: “Message to the Working People of Eastern Europe” originated by Henryk Siciński and adopted by the 1st National Delegates Convention. On 22 November he participated in the Warsaw-held meeting founding the Self-Governing Republic Clubs “Liberty – Equality– Independence” and signed the founding declaration. On 28 of that month he co-organized with Antoni Pietkiewicz a founding meeting of the Club in Kalisz. When martial law was declared he began to hide in Kalisz. Śliwa was arrested on 25 February 1982 and interned in Ostrów Wielkopolski and then in Gębarzew and Kwidzyn. After being released on 25 November 1982, he was immediately involved in the activity of the underground movement of „Solidarność”. He edited the first two issues of “Nasza Solidarność” magazine published in Kalisz. Śliwa co-invented and co-organized the 1st May march that was independent from the authorities’ one held in Kalisz in 1983. Consequently, he was temporarily arrested and detained in Ostrów Wielkopolski. On 7 June 1983 he was released from custody. The amnesty declared on 21 July 1983 caused that the investigation against him was discontinued. In July of the same year he co-founded the Inter-Regional Coordination Commission of the Independent Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarność” Kalisz-Konin-Sieradz. As he could not find any work and he and his family were exposed to psychological harassment, he emigrated to Sweden on 30 December 1983. He worked, among other positions, as bookbinder. He was the board secretary of the Congress of Poles in Sweden. In 1984 he commented the death of priest Jerzy Popiełuszko in “Dagens Nyheter” daily. He was also interviewed by Radio Liberty. Śliwa commenced cooperating with representatives of the „Solidarność” Coordination Office in Paris, Brussels and Stockholm. On 18 April 1985 the Military Garrison Prosecutor’s Office in Wrocław initiated investigations against Śliwa, charging him with activities detrimental to political interests of the People’s Republic of Poland. Subsequently, on 10 July 1985 this public prosecutor’s office decided to issue an arrest warrant for him. On the same day the public prosecutor suspended criminal proceedings against him. In December 1985, after the courageous escape of two brothers, Adam and Krzysztof Zieliński, from Poland to Sweden, he helped them prevent their deportation and stay in their new homeland. He expressed his opinion on this issue on Swedish television and in “ Dagens Nyheter” daily. His intervention helped them legally stay in Sweden. In 1989 he arrived in Poland. During this short visit he met and talked with his colleagues from the so-called first „Solidarność”. Bogusław Śliwa died in Stockholm on 23 November 1989. He was buried there on 7 December 1989. On 18 October 2006 he was posthumously honoured by Lech Kaczynski, President of Poland, with the Order of Polonis Restitution. On 15 June 2007 Bogusław Śliwa was posthumously granted the title of an Honorary Citizen of Kalisz by the Town Council of Kalisz.

W stronę radykalnego pluralizmu religijnego

Książka stanowi poszerzoną i uzupełnioną wersję pracy magisterskiej, napisanej pod kierunkiem prof. Tadeusza Buksińskiego w Instytucie Filozofii im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu.