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

Results found: 12

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 article aims at showing that the philosophical personalism of Pope John Paul II (Karol Wojtyla) stems from the common sense approach to reality. First, it presents Karol Wojtyla as a framer of the Lublin Philosophical School, to which he was affiliated for 24 years before being elected Pope John Paul II; it shows Wojtyla’s role in establishing this original philosophical School by his contribution to its endorsement of Thomism, its way of doing philosophy, and its classically understood personalism. Secondly, it identifies a purpose of Wojtyla’s use of the phenomenological method in his personalism and reconstructs Wojtyla’s possible answer to the question whether there is a link between moral sense and common sense in human experience.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

PHILOSOPHY IN SEMINARIES

100%
EN
The author attempts to answer the question concerning whether or not philosophy is needed in seminaries. In light of his analysis, it can be concluded that philosophical studies for future priests are a serious alternative to the fideistic positions often adopted by Catholics. The presence of philosophy in the seminary curriculum is supported by: (1) the need for building intellectual foundations of the religious faith professed by a cleric; the faith which cannot do without reason and abstain from justifying the rationale of its content; 2) the need for introducing the alumnus to the mysteries of the classical philosophy of being which can equip him with a better understanding of human nature and the surrounding reality. In this way, the seminarian: (1) acquires a reasonable belief that the human mind is able to know the objective and universal truth, including the truth about God as the Ultimate Cause of all that exists; (2) is able to enter into an intelligent dialogue about the truth with an increasingly globalized world.
EN
The following article is focused on the question of the primary task of philosophy in culture. The problem of philosophy itself is the starting point here. The author observes a chronic discord among philosophers on what philosophy is that undermines the identity of the afore-mentioned as well as disables it from determining its tasks in the culture. Thus, he attempts to determine the nature of philosophy indirectly. The author indicates what philosophy is not and has never been from its beginning, and can not be if it be itself. According to the author, myth is an effective negative criterion with which to determine the true character of philosophy. Philosophy’s aspiration to emancipate itself from myth’s influence justifies the effort to search the foundation of philosophy in contradistinction from myth, and enabling a determination of philosophy directly by indicating its constitutive factors. To philosophize is to know things as they are in the real world, or as they are related to the real world. A reflection on philosophy is not only possible, but also necessary. Since philosophy is part of human culture, the author concludes that the primary task of philosophy in culture consists in justifying the identity of philosophy as such.
Studia Gilsoniana
|
2015
|
vol. 4
|
issue 4
281-392
EN
The author undertakes an attempt to answer the following question: is Christian philosophy possible today? The question seems to be of great importance due to the fact that what Christians who try to do philosophy usually encounter is bitter criticism which comes to them from two sides at once: that of academy and that of the Church. In short, for academy their philosophy is too Christian, and for the Church it is too academic. Being indebted to the insights of Étienne Gilson and Mieczyslaw A. Krapiec (the original Polish spelling: Mieczysław Albert Krąpiec, pronounced: myechisuaf albert krompyetz), the author comes to the conclusion that Christian philosophy is possible today only if: 1) it is not identified with the art of persuasion, as its final end lies in gaining understanding rather than being convincing, 2) it is the work of a Christian, and 3) it has the real world as its object and metaphysics as its method. For Christian philosophy—which in essence consists in doing philosophy by Christians in order to get more rational understanding of their religious faith—should be identified with the perfection of the intellect achieved by practicing the classical philosophy of being.
Studia Gilsoniana
|
2015
|
vol. 4
|
issue 3
333-342
EN
The article consists of four parts. First, it gives an example of statism present in contemporary Europe which consists in giving a priority of loyalty to the state at the expense of loyalty to God. Secondly, it traces the idea of European statism in the thought of Hobbes and Hegel to show how the state was to replace or equal God’s authority. Thirdly, it considers whether democracy can efficiently protect against statism. Finally, it explores the words of Jesus Christ—“Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”—to formulate an argument against trading Christian faith for the philosophy of statism.
Studia Gilsoniana
|
2017
|
vol. 6
|
issue 1
85-96
EN
The author attempts to answer the following question: Why does Christian witness need contemplation? He claims that Christian witness needs contemplation, because contemplation reveals the truth about the nature of reality; it is this truth which is one of the factors that constitute the foundation of Christian faith. In a sense, contemplation is analogical to mysticism: as mystical visions make Christian belief grounded on the immediate experience of (meeting with) the Truth, so the contemplation of the creatures makes Christian belief based on the indirect experience of the Truth (i.e., the meeting with the traces left by the Creator in the world).
EN
The author undertakes the problem of the identity of Western civilization in the light of a correlation between politics and religion. First, he traces the theoretical debates about the mutual correspondence of politics and religion in ancient Greece. Following two extreme errors depicted by Sophocles in his “Antigone,” and by Plato in his “Apology of Socrates,” he infers that the “Golden Mean” is necessary in resolving the problem of politics and religion. Then, he examines the underlying errors put forward in the history. His investigations show the erroneousness of endowing either politics or religion with sovereign status in culture. There is always a conflict between politics and religion unless man regains his own sovereignty from them. Ultimately the author arrives at the conclusion that the “Golden Mean” correlating politics and religion distinctly strengthens the identity of the Western Civilization, and consists in respecting all real and universal parameters of human person life, such as cognition, freedom (and responsibility), love, agency in law, ontological sovereignty, and religious dignity.
EN
The author attempts to justify the thesis of the servient character of political power. By his analyses, he arrives at two conclusions. First, the ultimate goal of service fulfilled by political power should be identical with the natural goal of every human being, meaning a life of virtue. Hence, service to the cause of the citizens’ virtue requires that the fundamental duties of power include the protection of public peace, the promotion of actions towards the common good, and striving for a common abundance of worldly possessions. Second, to elect those in political power it is necessary to make sure that aspirants to such are characterized by the appropriate level of virtuous development. Each candidate should be first and foremost a person possessing a high moral quality (virtus boni viri), where prudence and magnanimity appear to be virtues especially fitting power (virtutes boni principis).
EN
The author intends to make an appeal for paying closer attention to human nature in educating genuine leaders. His philosophical approach embraces following topics: (1) whether leaders are born with talents and traits that allow, or even cause, them to be successful leaders, or whether effective leadership behaviors can be learned through education and experience; (2) whether the influence exercised by groups or individuals can be considered as a necessary and sufficient factor in explaining leadership; (3) whether leaders lead the followers to achieve the required end for the sake of the end itself, or rather that of those who are to achieve it – in other words, whether the followers exist for the end or the end for the followers. The author concludes that well-educated leaders are those who know not to confuse the ultimate end with particular ones in their own life and in that of others.
PL
The article aims at elucidating relations between culture and civilization. Its structure is twofold and contains the history of these two ideas before their meeting, as well as the typology of their correlation. The mutual relations between culture and civilization depend on an attitude toward the idea of human progress. While the unidirectional development of the mankind is assumed, it is possible to distinguish both positions of the actual or potential identity of culture and civilization in the respect of their content and extent (Pope John Paul II, Fukuyama), and positions of the separation, subordination or complementation of them (Kant, Weber, Maritain, Toffler, Tatarkiewicz). When the multidirectional growth of the mankind is presupposed, then there come into sight positions where civilizations integrate or accomplish cultures (Koneczny, Huntington, Braudel, Toynbee, Spengler). As the notions of culture and civilization can be used by scholars at will, the given typology inspires a respect for some traditional interpretations.
Studia Gilsoniana
|
2016
|
vol. 5
|
issue 1
269-281
EN
The article aims at demonstrating that, by his teaching on human person and his action, St. John Paul II (also known as Karol Wojtyła) implicitly contributed to a resolution of the most serious problem of contemporary philosophy, which consists in separating wisdom from love and substituting wisdom with understanding or knowledge. The author concludes that John Paul II makes a persuasive contribution to recover philosophy as the love of wisdom by (1) identifying truth in the area of freedom, self-fulfillment and conscience, and (2) appealing to man’s honesty and happiness.
EN
Considerations, undertaken by the article, lead to a conclusion that reason and faith as sources of knowing God are determined by many factors. Analyses of Zofia J. Zdybicka’ s works show that the rational knowledge about God is conditioned with limits of the human nature, specificity of the nature of Absolute Being, as well as historical and cultural contexts (which contain possibilities of common sense knowledge, and type of philosophical cognition). While the knowledge about God acquired through religious faith is shaped with the historical Revelation of Divine Persons, and forms of its social and personal reception. So if reason and faith have their own autonomy, ie. “spaces” where they can be realized in accordance with their own natures, then it is not possible to give up on any of them without disturbing to know not only God, but man as well.
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.