Simone Weil’s questions about God

We can say that the 20th century was not an era for seeking the truth in the first place. Philosophers and others were absorbed with the idea that we cannot know anything for certain. No one is able to claim that something is really true. However, we can find philosophers who were willing to die for the truth. We can discover them in the Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant Churches. For example, father Pavel Florensky, a Russian philosopher and priest, played an important role in solving the problem of correlation between culture and religion. He died executed by the firing squad at the Solovki Gulag on December 8th, 1937. Another such philosopher was St. Edith Stein. She was martyred equally for the truth of the Catholic Faith and for the truth of Mosaic Faith. Edith Stein was put on a train heading for the East and died in the gas chambers of Auschwitz probably on 9th August, 1942. The third person, who died for the truth in those horrible times, was Dietrich Bonhoeffer. The integrity of his Christian faith and life led him to a concentration camp, where he was hanged on April 9th, 1945. Looking at those great people of European history in the 20th century, we can see some contrasts and similarities to the life and activity of a French thinker – Simone Weil. Simone Weil was looking for the truth all her life. She was Jewish, but she was attracted to Roman Catholicism and sure that the truth is in God. Simone Weil persuades us that it is at the same time possible and impossible to know God, because “Dieu ne peut ętre présent dans la création que sous la forme de l’absence”.

W oczekiwaniu na Paruzję. Myśl eschatologiczna w prawosławnym piśmiennictwie słowiańskim do początku XVI wieku

Wydział Filologii Polskiej i Klasycznej: Instytut Filologii Słowiańskiej

Religijne motywy w tworczości syberyjskiego pisarza Wiktora Astafjewa

Wydział Neofilologii: Instytut Filologii Rosyjskiej

Towards an Orthodox Marxian Reading of Subsumption(s) of Academic Labour

This paper deploys an orthodox Marxian reading of the concept of subsumption of labour under capital. It does so through a brief, critical overview of the components of the Marxian conceptual instrument of subsumption of labour under capital (formal, real, hybrid and ideal subsumption). Recapitulating Marx’s concept, it sheds some light on the consequences of such a reading as a way of understanding the current transformation of the global higher education sector into a capitalist production sector per se. The reconstruction is then considered here as an attempt to approximate the specifics of the subsumption of labour under capital within the higher education sector. Moreover, the paper aims at showing that a discussion of the university dominated by capital with reference to the functioning or constituting of markets does not provide real opportunities for the understanding and solution of such problems as precarization, exploitation or acceleration of academic work. Thus, it joins a wider stream of Marxist higher education research and could be seen as a conceptual contribution to a critique of the political economy of higher education.