Rorty's Elective Affinities. The New Pragmatism and Postmodern Thought

The present book is devoted to "European connections of Richard Rorty's neopragmatism". The theme, chosen carefully and intentionally, is supposed to show the motivation behind the writing of the present work, as well as to show its intended extent. Let us consider briefly the first three parts of the theme, to enlighten a little our intentions. "European" is perhaps the most important description for it was precisely that thread that was most important to me, being the only context seriously taken into account, as I assumed right from the start that I would not be writing about rather more widely unknown to me - and much less fascinating (even to Rorty, the hero of the story) from my own, traditional, Continental philosophical perspective - American analytic philosophy. So accordingly I have almost totally skipped "American" connections (to use the distinction I need here) of Rorty's philosophy, that is to say, firstly, a years-long work within analytic philosophy, secondly struggles with it on its own grounds, and finally attempts to use classical American, mainly Deweyan, pragmatism for his own needs and numerous polemics associated with it - the questions that are far away from my interests and that arise limited interest among reading and writing philosophical audience in Poland, and perhaps also among Continental philosophers. It did not seem possible to me to write a book on Rorty in his American connections for they are insufficiently known to me, demanding knowledge of both post-war American analytic philosophy as well as pragmatism of its father-founders. I could see, setting to work on Richard Rorty, that a book on his American connections (leaving aside the issue that it would not be a philosophical problem but rather, let us say, the one of writing a monograph) written by a Polish philosopher in Poland and then in the USA was not a stimulating intellectual challenge but rather a thankless working task. Besides, having spent much time on Rorty's philosophy, writing extensively about him and translating his works, I already knew that the "Continental" context was extremely important to his neopragmatism, and that thinking about it could be relatively prolific (as opposed to the context potentially given by American philosophy).

W stronę estetyki egzystencji: Michel Foucault

„Dziś jego postawa zapiera dech. Dać żyjącym exempla...”, powiada Paul Veyne w eseju Ostatni Foucault i jego moralność, i powiada tak o Foucault, ale gdy się nad tym zastanowić, w tradycji filozoficznej można odnaleźć cały ciąg postaci, które w pewnych okresach życia pragnęły jednego - właśnie chciały „dać żyjącym exempla”. Takim przykładem wśród jeszcze nie piszących filozofów mógłby być Sokrates. Tacy byli cynicy, a zwłaszcza bodaj najgłośniejszy z nich, Diogenes. Tacy wreszcie byli i stary Kant, i stary Nietzsche. Ich życie i ostatnie dzieła to często swoiste podręczniki życia, jednak nie tyle zobowiązujące powszechnością i obiektywnością wypowiadanych twierdzeń, co raczej przekonujące subiektywnością i jednostkowością przykładu. Każdy z nich, na swój sposób, dawał przykład jako filozof. Filozofował, dając przykład — swoim życiem, swoim dziełem. Czasami i jednym, i drugim. Istnieje grono filozofów, których życie było niezwykle blisko związane z działalnością filozoficzną, u których często trudno oddzielić filozofię od życia, u których konstytuuje się (Foucaulta) „ethos, filozoficzny sposób życia.” Sokrates, który nie ucieka przed sądem, choć może, i nie unika śmierci, choć może; Diogenes, kochany przez Ateńczyków skandalista, o którym Żywoty i poglądy słynnych filozofów powiadają, że „w byle jakim miejscu załatwiał wszystkie swoje sprawy”; Kant, który przez całe życie wstaje dokładnie o 4:55 na hasło swojego sługi, Lampego, Es ist Zeit, Herr Professor! i którego przechadzki po Królewcu mogą zastępować wskazania zegara; Nietzsche kończący w Turynie Ecce homo, jakby w przewidywaniu zbliżającej się katastrofy; i wreszcie umierający na AIDS i gorączkowo poprawiający na szpitalnym łóżku ostatnie dwa tomy Historii seksualności Michel Foucault (pytanie o splot jego własnego życia z ostatnim fragmentem jego dzieła jest pytaniem niezwykle trudnym, a odpowiedzi nie są jednoznaczne). Można by powiedzieć, iż każdy z nich pragnął wzmocnić swoją filozofię przykładem swojego życia. Asceza Kanta jest przecież nieodłączna od jego etyki, „troska o siebie” Foucaulta jest nieodłączna od jego „estetyki egzystencji”, śmierć Sokratesa i Nietzschego odejście od świadomego życia jedynie wzmacniają moc ich filozoficznych i etycznych wyborów (można by wręcz zastanawiać się, co stałoby się z Sokratesa „przykładem”, gdyby zdecydował się na ucieczkę z Aten, podobnie z myślą Nietzschego, gdyby, jak Hegel pod koniec życia, jedynie grał w karty...). Kant w trzeciej części Sporu fakultetów, Nietzsche w Ecce homo, Foucault w ostatnich częściach Historii seksualności (i pracach ją dopełniających), poza wszystkim innym, dają siebie za przykład: nie tyle od razu i po prostu wart naśladowania, lecz właśnie na początek jedynie wart przemyślenia. Paradoksalnie, to właśnie w ostatniej pracy Kanta i ostatniej pracy Nietzschego ich życie splata się z dziełem w jeden węzeł, to książki pisane własną krwią (jak powiedziałby Bataille, uważny czytelnik Nietzschego), własnym życiem.

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.

Analityczna filozofia dziejów w poznańskiej szkole metodologicznej. Próba falsyfikacji Popperowskiej krytyki historii teoretycznej

The purpose of this paper is the reconstruction of the theory of historical process elaborated at the Poznań School of Methodology. The heuristic tool will be Popper’s model of knowledge, according to which, the development of scientific theory went through the phase of the posing of the scientific problem, proposing a tentative theory, a critical discussion and its modification. Proposed by Leszek Nowak the adaptive interpretation of historical materialism was transformed – under the influence of the elaboration of the idealizational theory of science and the categorical interpretation of dialectics – into the generalized version of historical materialism. This version includes theory of the class and primitive societies. Difficulties in the building of the theory of real socialism led to the transformation of adaptive historical materialism into the non-Marxian historical materialism where some tenets of Marxism were refuted (e.g. the domination of economy over politics). In the course of the building of the adaptive interpretation of historical materialism and the non-Marxian historical materialism some primary notions were defined and modified satisfying the criteria of falsification. Although Popper severely criticized the possibility of theoretical history, the theory of history as developed at the Poznań School of Methodology satisfies his criteria of falsification. This throws doubt upon the validity of Popperian critique of theoretical history.

Recreasaõ filozofica ou Dialogo sobre a filozofia natural, para instrucsaõ de pesoas curiozas, que naõ frequentáraõ as aulas /

Mode of access: Internet.

Recreasaõ filozofica ou Dialogo sobre a filozofia natural, para instrucsaõ de pesoas curiozas, que naõ frequentáraõ as aulas /

Mode of access: Internet.

Recreasaõ filozofica ou Dialogo sobre a filozofia natural, para instrucsaõ de pesoas curiozas, que naõ frequentáraõ as aulas /

Mode of access: Internet.

Recreasaõ filozofica ou Dialogo sobre a filozofia natural, para instrucsaõ de pesoas curiozas, que naõ frequentáraõ as aulas /

Mode of access: Internet.

Recreasaõ filozofica ou Dialogo sobre a filozofia natural, para instrucsaõ de pesoas curiozas, que naõ frequentáraõ as aulas /

Mode of access: Internet.

Filozofia ekonomii materyalnéj ludzkiego społeczeństwa.

Mode of access: Internet.

Konstrukcje tożsamości i bogactwo kulturowe w autobiografiach Güntera Grassa i Marcela Reicha-Ranickiego jako wyzwanie translatorskie

Wydział Neofilologii: Instytut Filologii Germańskiej

Paradygmatyczny u(ś)cisk wychowania. Zarys koncepcji ujęcia paradygmatu nauki jako widowiska kulturowego

Celem artykułu jest zarys koncepcji paradygmatu nauki sprowadzonego do widowiska kulturowego. Zasadniczymi kontekstami dla naszych rozważań sa definicje paradygmatu podane przez T. S. Kuhna i Z. Kwiecińskiego. W nawiązaniu do nich zostanie wyłonionych siedem faz rozwoju/przekształceń paradygmatu, następnie sięgniemy do jego odniesień naukowych i mitycznych powiązanych z technologią, z różnymi formami i funkcjami rytuału oraz z procesem rytualizacji. W wyniku zebranych tutaj informacji dojdziemy do stanowiska, z którego może wynikać, że paradygmat nauki jest widowiskiem społeczno-kulturowym. Zestawione tutaj wnioski pozwolą nam przejść do przykładu związanego z wychowaniem, - z paradygmatem wychowania i wyjaśnić sobie, na czym polega – zgodnie z tytułem artykułu – różnica między uściskiem a uciskiem wychowania. Całość kończy podsumowanie, w którym omówimy związek technologii rytualizacji i polityczności z władzą oraz zestawię w punktach informacje na temat paradygmatu. (PS – w tytule u(ś)cisk można tłumaczyć: ucisk/uścisk)

Spór o wspólnotę w perspektywie badań nad miastem postindustrialnym

Wydział Nauk Społecznych: Instytut Kulturoznawstwa