At the beginning, the author presents some basic intuitions determining the necessity for philosopher’s reflections on not only numerical singularity, but also individuality. Then he considers briefly four selected types of individuality, namely: anything existing, the universe, a person and the Absolute. Nevertheless, for different reasons, in each of these cases it is possible to assume an impossible to fully express entity, that is, individuality. The next part develops the idea of a person’s individuality which stays directly linked with his or her permanent act of self-creation. The essence of the act would lie in a radical distinction between the person and any other human being as well as in generating the own, absolute personal otherness. At more accurate, largely speculative characteristics of this act it turns out to be necessary to redefine such categories like duty, responsibility, trust.
The author attempts to confirm the shocking thesis introduced at the outset, that the philosophical struggle with the problem of evil and precisely with evil itself proves to be more heroic than fighting off the greatest real-life misfortunes. The considerations are based on several metaphilosophical assumptions. Nonetheless, the most significant inspiration for the assumptions is outlined by J. Nabert’s meta-ethical experience of the “unjustifiable”. One of the key theses of the article can be formulated as follows: acts of evil consist in unreasoned rebellions against the act of good. Metaphorically speaking, acts of evil are in fact a desperate cry for the absolute affirmation of a duty and for the absolute act of good.The final conclusions suggest the philosophical roots of this attitude and call for their future, metaphilosophical study.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.