Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 8

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The term Sozial Frage, as well as “pauperization”, became popular in public discussion in the 1830s during the transformation of the feudal, guild and agrarian society into the democratic and capitalist one. As a result the institution of the family disappeared, at least as a productive and social unit, which guaranteed protection and safety; on the other hand, the number of population increased significantly, accompanied by big migrations from villages to towns, and a huge emigration, especially to the USA. The enormous deregulation of the production relations brought about a loss of sense of safety; it affected mainly the lower classes and workers. New phenomena appeared: unemployment, industrial accidents, many people fell into poverty as a result of diseases. On the other hand, the workers’ wages were very low in comparison to the elementary needs. The capitalism of that time meant mainly a rapid economic growth, but the threats and opportunities were very unequally divided – very few were given the opportunities and chances, whereas very many the threats and risks. The workers’ wages were growing faster than the prices, but the areas of poverty and pauperization, not covered by any protection or social care, were enormous. The housing conditions were awful, the food was very poor, which was a consequence of migration to towns from villages where both things were usually better; in towns food expenses ate up almost all the wages. Another question resulting from poverty was child labour, quite common in the 19th century. In craftsman and peasant families women had no time to look after their children. Peasants and craftsmen still used to think that their children should be accustomed to the jobs inherited from their parents as soon as possible. Child labour in the country and in factories was widespread, which delayed the dissemination of common education. In spite of that, in the first half of the 19th century Darwinian ideology was still alien to the Prussians. The early liberalism was based on the pre-industrialism and patriarchal ideas, and it was craft in the centre of such thinking, not industry. It was considered that all the people after receiving education and acquiring property became citizens. There was class consciousness, but the class structure of society was thought to be temporary. Before 1848 the Prussians knew about the English pauperism and tried to avoid it in their country turning to state’s interventionism, which at that time was not a taboo subject. It was analyzed how taxes might relieve the poorest. However, those ideas were rejected, at the earliest in the Rhineland. The liberal trends became stronger and stronger. It was them Karl Marx meant when he said that capitalism destroys all the values, including religion, and the only one that is left is profit.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

KOBIETA W PRUSACH 1871–1933

100%
EN
In Prussia the turn of the 20th century brought about enormous civilization progress which was accompanied by an improvement in the standards of living. This process had already taken place in the German Reich and was followed by political, social and economic changes which affected women as well. Most importantly, at that time they gradually won more educational rights. Until the 19th century women’s educational attainment was limited to primary education and home schooling by governesses. Subsequently, girls were admitted to secondary schools for girls and eventually they were granted the right to sit high school final examinations and access tertiary education. Since mid-19th century women were allowed to join political organizations and after World War I they acquired political rights. Although much depended on a person’s individual disposition and personality, the middle-class mentality of the time was considerably patriarchal, hence equal rights in real interpersonal relationships became a fact only in the 20th century. Contrary to popular misconceptions, working women were commonplace already in the 19th century; unfortunately, as a rule the reason for women’s work was poverty, while attractive professions requiring high qualifications remained unavailable to women. The first changes consisted in allowing women into the teaching profession on graduating from teacher training colleges and then allowing them into the medical and legal colleges and professions. As a consequence of a dramatic decrease in the rate of infant and child mortality, women ceased to be ‘birth machines’, as they had been perceived until then, and instead of giving birth to six or eight children, they had two or three, which had a dramatic impact on their living conditions and opened new life perspectives for them.
EN
One of the features of premodern era in Prussia was relatively low crime rate with a different structure than it is nowadays. Moreover, there was a different perception and functioning of sphere of justice and of law enforcement. With regard to the size of transgression, the rural territories characterized in minor transgression, whereas bigger cities characterized in more serious crimes; due to the fact that bigger cities did not give security against hunger, ensured anonymity and the ability for perpetrators to hide. Similarly to the contemporary world of crime, theft was a dominant crime, whereas murder was most severely punished. Furthermore, the role of crimes against morality was significant; importantly, the concept of sin was basically synonymous with crime and was reflected in the regulation matters. Generally, it was universal phenomenon and occurred not only in Prussia. Nevertheless, Prussia was reformed quicker. Moreover, the threat of vagrants and beggars, who did not have a dwelling, aroused concern; they might have constituted as much as 10% of the population in the 18th c. Aggressive behaviours and those associated with physical violence against women and children intensified. The ‘excessive’ beating was criticised, nonetheless the phenomena of beating as such was not considered as an offence. Violence com-mitted by a father and husband against his family belonged to the prerogatives of power. In the period of Enlightenment, the authorities of Prussia, and above all Frederick II brought about the elimination of a number of anachronisms in the perception and treatment of crime. Taking into consideration the European revolution, the above mentioned changes happened very quickly. Firstly, equality before the law was introduced, however it was not implemented properly; patrimonial jurisdiction, on the other hand, was at first limited and later on eliminated. Proportionate punishment appeared; tortures and the cruellest punishments ceased being applied. Imprisonment began to spread, along with the religious tolerance. Witch hunt and barbarous penalties for so-called moral offenses (sex before marriage, prostitution) were abandoned, likewise death punishment for homosexual and suicides etc. Since the 18th cen-tury the institution of the police began to develop, before that time it did not exist at all. The number of criminal activities increased due to urbanisation and industrialisation. Large agglomerations emerged, giving their dwellers anonymity; moreover, the phenomenon of strong family, which at the same time was an economic unit, withered. In the industrial capitalism the central place was occupied by the nuclear family. The member of this family was a worker who was at risk of unemployment with a weak sense of security. It is difficult to assess the impact of the increasing secularization on the increase in crime. However, the negative influence of wrecking the old social and community ties (religion, family, and commune) has to be highlighted. Rebellions caused by hunger (either connected with infertility or epidemics) were other major aspects of crime in the 19th c.
EN
The classic interpretation of the history of Prussian culture is rightly associated with militarism and the spiked helmet. The Prussian “spirit of Potsdam" is commonly contrasted with the “spirit of Weimar”, a perspective long exploited in the literature of the subject. However, there are other noteworthy viewpoints. Already in the period of Enlightenment Berlin was a city of the free spirit of learning, intellectuals and journalists. Publications on civilizational, social and economic reforms abounded. The 18th century was a period of departure from pre-modern mechanisms of financing art by court, church and municipal patronage. The emerging art market became governed by the demand and taste of the bourgeoisie and subsequently of the general public, although the middle class remained the leading group in this respect, imposing its standards on the lower social strata. Having become wealthy the bourgeoisie began to imitate aristocracy, among others in lavish and luxurious interior decoration, but with an excess characteristic of neophytes. The development of culture in 19th century Prussia was fuelled by enormous technical progress (e.g. the railway) and immense growth of institutions for the spreading of progress and culture (education system, healthcare, pension scheme). The advance of literacy and the press as well as readership (libraries and reading rooms) facilitated the creation of mass political parties and trade unions in addition to the participation of the masses in the political reality through the means of culture. The previous concentration on religious topics waned, giving way to secular themes publicized by serialized novels in popular press. Nevertheless, until the 20th century sacred art continued as a major influence among the lower classes.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Teizm a twardy inkompatybilizm

100%
PL
Celem artykułu jest przedstawienie stanowiska zwanego twardym inkompatybilzimem i po­rów­nanie go z teistyczną, a w szczególności współczesną chrześcijańską koncepcją wolności woli ludzkiej. Twardy inkompatybilizm głosi, że wolność woli ludzkiej, rozumiana zarówno w sposób libertariański, jak i kompatbilistyczny, nie istnieje. W artykule zwraca się uwagę na pewną zbież­ność między tezą twardego inkompatybilizmu a opartą na Biblii mądrością chrześcijańską, gło­szącą zależność ontyczną i aksjologiczną człowieka od Boga. Zarazem jednak argumentuje się, że jednym z najważniejszych składników teologii i filozofii chrześcijańskiej jest doktryna o wol­ności woli ludzkiej i ludzkiej odpowiedzialności za zło. Doktryna ta jest niespójna z twar­dym inkompatybilizmem. W części końcowej artykułu przedstawiona jest syntetycznie propo­zy­cja, jak można uzgodnić ze sobą tezę indeterminizmu metafizycznego, która jest spójna z twar­dym in­komatybilizmem, z tezą libertarianizmu, która jest niespójna z twardym inkompaty­bi­lizmem.
XX
The aim of the article is to present and to compare the view on human freedom called hard incompatibilism with the contemporary Christian doctrine on human free will. Hard incompati­bilism claims that human free will understood both in a libertarian and compatibilist way does not exist. One stresses in the paper that there is a similarity between hard incompatibilism and Chri­stian wisdom rooted in the Bible and this similarity consists in the fact that humans are deeply dependent in their existence on external conditions. Hard incompatiblism identifies that con­di­tions simply as the external or physical world and Christian wisdom points to God as an onto­logical and axiological foundation of human being and prospects. However, one argues in the paper that the doctrine of human freedom and responsibility for sin and moral evil is a crucial part of the Christian theology and philosophy. Thus, the Christian doctrine is incoherent with hard incompatibilism. There is a proposal, put forth in the last part of the article, how one can recon­cile metaphysical indeterminism—which is coherent with hard incompatibilism—with the liber­tarian doctrine on the human free will, which is coherent with the Christian view on the na­ture of human freedom.
EN
To have a roof over one’s head was an unattainable dream for many people in Prussia after 1871 in the era of industrialisation and urbanisation. The groups for whom that problem was the most acute were: peasants, agricultural labourers, labourers paid per day, factory workers, craftsmen, poorer white collar workers and low-ranking officials. The dwelling forms were strongly influenced by a growing phenomenon of pauperisation of lower urban classes, industrialisation, an enormous inflow of people into towns, inappropriate nutrition and an inadequate satisfaction of other basic needs. Yet, it was in the 19th century when the bourgeois cultural image of a friendly home was constructed, which has become a space of rest against the threats of the outside world and a basis for the present-day mass concept. But, at that time only members a tiny part of the society managed to get this friendly retreat; for the overwhelming majority their homes were just sleeping places.
EN
There was a breakthrough in the scope of nutrition in the half of the 19th c. in Prussia. There was a revolutionary “delocation” of the nutrition system, so the connection between nutrition and place of residence (I eat only what was produced in my place of living). This meant the end of local famine due to food transport by train and transoceanic steamships. Thanks to fertilizing and cattle breeding as well as new crops, despite the increase in population number, the production and the consumption of food rocketed. The consumption in Prussia between 1850 and 1900 increased by 113%, the consumption of wheat by 147% and the consumption of rye by 24%. In 1800 potatoes constituted 10% of crop production in Prussia and in year 1883 it equaled 71%. The consumption of potatoes and sugar (sugar beet) was popularized. Among the middle-class members, a modern cuisine and its dishes were shaped as well as eating habits which to a large extent have been present today and understood as the national cuisine. There was a huge variety of quality of food which was connected with material status and remuneration. In case of many workers, the food was poor and deprived of necessary nutrients. Particular difficulties occurred during economic crises, which sometimes appeared to be dramatic (1914–1918, 1923–1924, 1929–1933). Generally, the real salaries grew dynamically, especially starting from the end of the 19th c., which made the 19th c. different from the more constant 18th c. In Prussia there was a variety in the level of food consumption connected with the higher economic level in the Western provinces. As it was commented by the king’s professor Schubert, 1/3 of rural population of Eastern Prussia ate potatoes only and resigned from bread as their main food. The situation of small holders and daily workers was the most difficult. Eastern rural province of Prussia had a problem with handling the overpopulation of small holders who were looking for a better place for living in emigration (Ostflucht, Landflucht and even to America). It was later overcome.
PL
W połowie XIX wieku nastąpił przełom w zakresie żywienia w Prusach. Nastąpiła rewolucyjna „delokalizacja” systemu żywienia a więc zerwany został związek między żywieniem i miejscem zamieszkania (jem to co wytworzono w miejscu mojego zamieszkania), co oznacza koniec lokalnych klęsk głodu, przerwanych przez transport żywności koleją oraz transoceanicznymi parowcami. Dzięki nawożeniu i poprawie hodowli bydła oraz nowym uprawom, pomimo wzrostu liczby ludności bardzo wzrosła produkcja i konsumpcja żywności. Konsumpcja w Prusach między rokiem 1850, a 1900 wzrosła o 113%, pszenicy o 147%, żyta o 24%. W 1800 r. ziemniaki stanowiły w Prusach 10% produkcji zbożowej, a w 1883 r. 71%. Nastąpiło upowszechnienie konsumpcji ziemniaków oraz cukru (burak cukrowy). Wśród osób średniozamożnych kształtowała się nowoczesna kuchnia i jej potrawy, oraz zwyczaje żywieniowe, które w znacznym stopniu utrzymały się do dzisiaj, jako kuchnia narodowa. Utrzymywało się jednak duże zróżnicowanie w jakości żywienia związane z położeniem materialnym i wynagrodzeniem. W wypadku znacznej części robotników żywienie było marne i pozbawione koniecznych składników odżywczych. Szczególne trudności miały miejsce w okresach kryzysów gospodarczych, które przyjmowały niekiedy dramatyczną postać (1914–1918, 1923–1924, 1929–1933). Generalnie jednak realne płace dynamicznie rosły, szczególnie od końca XIX w., czym wiek XIX różnił się od bardziej statycznego wieku XVIII. Na obszarze Prus występowało też zróżnicowanie poziomu konsumpcji żywności, związane z wyższym poziomem gospodarczym prowincji zachodnich. Jak to komentował królewiecki profesor Schubert, 1/3 ludności wiejskiej Prus Wschodnich żywiła się samymi ziemniakami i zrezygnowała z chleba, jako głównego pożywienia. Najtrudniejsza była sytuacja licznej ludności małorolnej i robotników dniówkowych. Wschodnie rolnicze prowincje Prus miały problem z poradzeniem sobie z nadwyżką ludności małorolnej, która szukała szczęścia w emigracji (Ostflucht, Landflucht na zachód, a nawet do Ameryki, co udało się przezwyciężyć.
PL
W artykule prezentuję pogląd, że ocena moralna osób modlących się w sytuacjach skrajnych (zagrożenie życia) powinna być formułowana w oparciu o znajomość pewnych nierzeczywistych okresów warunkowych. Chodzi tu o okresy warunkowe opisujące sytuacje, w których osoby modlące się mogłyby wybrać, gdyby zechciały, inne niż modlitwa sposoby ocalenia siebie lub najbliższych. Jednakże ponieważ nie znamy wartości logicznej takich zdań, nie mamy wystarczających podstaw do oceny moralnej takich osób. W dalszej części artykułu rozważam ogólne założenia racjonalności modlitw wstawienniczych w kontekście różnych odmian teizmu i sugeruję, że pojęcie Bożej odpowiedzi na takie modlitwy może mieć sens literalny w teizmie otwartym i probabilistycznym, a metaforyczny tylko w teizmie klasycznym.
EN
In my paper, I present the view that moral evaluation of praying persons in existentially extreme situations (danger of death) should be based on knowledge concerning the truth value of some counterfactual propositions. I have in mind the counterfactual propositions describing situations in which praying people might choose, according to their will, other means of salvation for themselves or for their loved ones—other than petitionary prayer (also called “impetratory prayer”). However, since we do not know the truth value of such counterfactual propositions, we do not have sufficient means to issue any moral evaluation of such persons. In the second part of the paper I consider some general assumptions of rationality of petitionary and intercessory prayers in the context of various forms of theism. I suggest there that the concept of the divine answer to such prayers may have a literal meaning provided that we accept open or probabilistic theism, and a merely metaphoric or figurative meaning if we accept classical theism.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.