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

Results found: 7

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Masaryk
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Masaryk a Kant : Vliv Brentanovy kritiky, souvislost s Masarykovou reakcí na mysticismus

100%
Svoboda J.
Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)
|
2009
|
vol. 57
|
issue 4
523-554
EN
The aim of this study is to highlight two interesting aspects of Masaryk’s relation to Kant against the background of the personality and influence of Masaryk’s Viennese teacher Franz Brentano and Brentano’s own relation to Kant’s philosophy. It helps to treat of two periods in Masaryk’s intellectual endeavour in relation to the particular in science, ethics and religion. In the first period, which is generally accompanied by a cold and reticent approach to Kant, Masaryk rejects the epistemological foundations of Kant’s philosophy (apriorism and the doctrine of the unknowability of the thing in itself), and instead, given his leaning towards positivism, places emphasis on the general method of scientific knowledge and its importance for philosophy. In this early period of his critical attitude to Kant we may tend towards the opinion that the personality of his teacher Franz Brentano stands behind Masaryk’s radical methodological rejection of Kant’s philosophy. The conspicuous similarity between Masaryk’s and Brentano’s conclusions on refuting Hume’s scepticism by the probability calculus caught the attention of Brentano’s pupils, Marty and Stumpf, who were working in Prague. Brentano, however, rejected any role in influencing Masaryk’s philosophical conclusions. The independence of Masaryk’s approach to the solution of this question is confirmed by correspondence he had with the young Husserl in 1878. In the next period, however, the radicalness recedes and Masaryk’s own personal approach to Kant’s philosophy becomes much more evident, as is shown in the background to the three-volume work Russia and Europe (1913). Masaryk’s ideas are not enriched only by the contrast between Russian and European thinking. A systematic study of Russian philosophy and literature enables him to penetrate deeper into the spiritual foundation of Russian thought. He thus uncovers a new creative dimension which is the starting point for a reevaluation of the significance of individual western European thinkers against the background of a different tradition. This is in particular true of the new view of Kant’s practical philosophy which serves Masaryk as a counter-argument to the mysticism and mythicality which form the fabric of the irrationality of Russian thought. The significance of Kant’s critical philosophy in the struggle against irrationality in thinking, as well as the emphasis on the example of Tolstoy’s rationa­listic ethics and conscience, together indicate that Masaryk’s ethics had broken out of the framework of traditional positivism and he was endorsing a more modern subjectivist thought. Masaryk did not, however, abandon his negative view of Kant’s epistemology.
2
Content available remote

Masaryk a rakouská filosofická tradice: Bolzano a Brentano

100%
David Z.
Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)
|
2008
|
vol. 56
|
issue 3
345-361
EN
In their recent writings on the development of Central European philosophy, Barry Smith and Rudolf Haller have drawn an important distinction between two traditions, one primarily empirical, the other essentially metaphysical, which they have designated as Austrian and German respectively. “For some time now,” according to Smith, “historians of philosophy have been gradually coming to terms with the idea that post-Kantian philosophy in the German-speaking world ought properly to be divided into two distinct strands which we might refer to as the German and the Austrian traditions.” One line led from Kant, Fichte, Hegel and Schelling to Heidegger, Adorno, and Bloch; the second line from Bolzano, Mach, and Meinong to Wittgenstein, Neurath, and Popper. (Austrian Philosophy: The Legacy of Brentano [Chicago, 1994], 1.) Thomas Masaryk, as an academic philosopher, was deeply rooted in the Austrian tradition. While he was only marginally concerned with Bernard Bolzano, his philosophical outlook was initially shaped by the teaching and the scholarship of Franz Brentano at the University of Vienna, particularly with regard to empirical psychology as the scientific foundation of modern philosophy. Nevertheless, his desideratum of incorporating a religious dimension into the intellectual life of modern man, led him to consider the outlook of the Austrian school too narrowly empirical and, therefore, inhospitable to concepts beyond the reality of sense perceptions. His search for a way of accommodating religious concepts tended to transcend the Austrian philosophical tradition.
3
Content available remote

Masarykova „Nová Evropa“

100%
Šabata J.
Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)
|
2012
|
vol. 60
|
issue 5
705-736
EN
The author reads in detail Masaryk’s war-time tract, New Europe, using it as a key to the thought of Masaryk as a philosopher of democracy. Through this humanistic-demo­cratic prism, distinctly his own, he then reads the fortunes of Czech consciousness from the birth of the Czechoslovak state (1918) down to the nineties of the 20th century. He thus presents the reader with an imposing overview of the meaning of Czech being through the eyes of T. G. Masaryk, that is, “from the perspective of eternity, because he was a realist”.
CS
Autor podrobně rozebírá Masarykův válečný traktát Nová Evropa a užívá jejjako klíč k myšlení T. G. M. jako myslitele demokracie. Tímto humanitně-demokratickým prismatem, výrazně masarykovským, pak probírá vývoj českého povědomí od vzniku československého státu po počátek devadesátých let 20. století. Předkládá tak čtenáři velkolepý pohled na smysl českého bytí očima T.G.M., tedy „z hlediska věčnosti, protože [Masaryk] byl realista.“
4
Content available remote

Masarykův vztah k nacionalismu

100%
David Z.
Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)
|
2010
|
vol. 58
|
issue 3
325-350
EN
Paul Anton de Lagarde (1827-1891) taught at the University of Göttingen from 1869 to 1889, and was a correspondent of Masaryk in the 1880s. Masaryk remained concerned with Lagarde’s teaching, even after his death in 1891, until the end of his own life. Masaryk’s relationship to Lagarde was not only complex, but also highly paradoxical in view of Masaryk’s own reputation for humanitarianism and tolerance, which may explain why scholars have shied away from the topic. Lagarde tended to appeal to radical nationalists in Germany, eventually including Hitler’s National Socialists, by his avid promotion of the German mission of colonization in the East and his sharp critique of Jewish influences in Christianity. The key to understanding Lagarde’s attractiveness for Masaryk is the latter’s search for a religious dimension to round out his own Weltanschauung. Initially, there could be a rapprochement on the grounds of Lagarde’s reduction of Christian religion to an inner ethical voice, which Masaryk felt was compatible (in its absence of dogma or historical narrative) with his own rationalist theism. Ultimately, however, the two thinkers grew out of two contrasting albeit both Central European strands of thought, Lagarde from the idealistic and ontically monistic school, Masaryk from the realistic and ontically pluralistic one. The former trend, known as the German philosophical tradition, had its source in the secularized Lutheran subjectivism, the latter trend, known as the Austrian philosophical tradition, had its source in the Josephist Catholic Enlightenment with its empirical objectivism. In the end the metaphysical divergence made itself felt in the stark contrast between Masaryk’s humanitarian cosmopolitanism and Lagarde’s nationalist xenophobia. This led to Masaryk’s repudiation of Lagarde as a political pace-setter, despite a residual respect for Lagarde as a theologian. The story of their encounter sharply illustrates the difference of the two philosophical traditions in their bearing on the genesis of nationalism in Central Europe.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Book Review: Milan Scholz, “České a polské hledání identity. Myšlení Tomáše Garrigua Masaryka a Romana Dmowského v komparativní perspektivě”, Praha: Ústav T. G. Masaryka, 2020. Pp. 653. ISBN 978-80-86142-61-6

85%
Masař T.
Colloquia Humanistica
|
2021
|
issue 10
1-6
PL
Artykuł jest prezentacją najnowszej książki Milana Scholza. Autor skupia się na relacji między myślą Tomaša G. Masaryka i Romana Dmowskiego w kontekście ich działalności, przede wszystkim polskiej i czeskiej debaty o tożsamości narodowej.
EN
The paper is a presentation of the latest book by Milan Scholz. The author focuses on the relationship between the thought of Masaryk and that of Dmowski in the context of their activity and respective Czech and Polish debates on national identity.
6

From the North-East Felvidék to Podkarpatská Rus (Kárpátalja), with Special Regard to the Activity of Masaryk and Beneš

80%
Gulyás L.
West Bohemian Historical Review
|
2018
|
vol. 8
|
issue 2
225-238
EN
In 1918–1919 the purest region of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy joined to the Czechoslovak Republic from the Hungarian Kingdom. At the first sight this was a simple proceeding. But according to our opinion in fact, the 1918–1919 developments in the history of the North-Eastern Felvidék were influenced four factors: 1. The conflicting efforts of countries intending to keep (Hungary) and to acquire (Czechoslovakia, Romania, Poland and various Ukrainian state formations) the region. 2. The people’s assemblies of the Ruthenian and Hungarian populations, with their diverging (ukranophile, hungarophile, czechophile) orientations and their searching for allies. 3. The activity of the Ruthenian emigration in the US, strongly favouring one possible scenario (i. e. the Czechoslovakian one). 4. The great powers’ decision about the fate of the region at the Versailles peace talks. Our paper surveys a seemingly most important element of this complex process, the activity of the Czechoslovak state founders Masaryk and Beneš; we also intend to present how their work resulted in the North-East Felvidék becoming Kárpátalja.
7

Koncepcja etyki indukcyjnej T. G. Masaryka

61%
Furman M.
IDEA. Studia nad strukturą i rozwojem pojęć filozoficznych
|
2017
|
vol. 29/1
EN
Masaryk is primarily known as the first president of Czechoslovakia. While completely concealed his activity as a philosopher. In the article I would like to present his scientific work as philosopher and sociologist. Interesting especially here is a phenomenological concept of ethics, which scratch Masaryk is looking for in the philosophy of Hume. He believes that the ethics has to rely on inductive thinking. At the same time, Masaryk point out that it is an interim ethics, which goal will be aimed in the future. On the one hand ethics can be a psychological, on the other hand it can also be seen as a transitional phase. In this sense, ethics based on the spirit of reason is the future of humanity.
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.