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

Refine search results

Results found: 2

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 reviewing Vladimir Jankélévitch’s book entitled “Penser la mort?” which is the only book of this author available in Polish translation. In the first part of the text the author tries to describe the views of Jankélévitch and emphasize their importance for the contemporary phi-losophy. Jankélévitch turns out to be a typical representative of the so-called philosophie de l’esprit . This classification is the starting point for further reflection and allows to look in the right way at the statements contained in the reviewed book. In the second part the author tries to polemicize with some thesies of Jankélévitch (relating to the problems of birth and death, the definition of religion and many different problems in the fields of philosophical anthropology and bioethics). The point of the text is (according to “Penser la mort?”) that the philosophical investigations of Jankélévitch seem to be not considered enough.
PL
Tekst ma na celu omówienie polemiki Bogusława Wolniewicza z abolicjonizmem naturalistycznym. Na początku omówiony zostaje podział stanowisk wobec kary głównej, a następnie argumenty abolicjonistów naturalistycznych. Głównymi cechami tych ostatnich są utylitaryzm, antropologiczny melioryzm i antynatywizm. Zupełnie w innym duchu są argumenty Wolniewicza: uznaje on koncepcję równej odpłaty jako jedyną możliwą do konsekwentnej obrony koncepcję sprawiedliwości (rygoryzm). Jego stanowisko cechuje pejoryzm i natywizm. Na końcu podjęty zostaje problem utrzymania koncepcji wolności i odpowiedzialności na gruncie radykalnego antropologicznego natywizmu. W celu naświetlenia problemu zostaje przywołana koncepcja tragizmu Henryka Elzenberga.
EN
The paper aims at discussing Wolniewicz’s polemics with naturalistic abolitionism. At first, the division of positions regarding the main punishment and then the arguments of naturalistic abolitionists are discussed. The main features of the latter are utilitarianism, anthropological meliorism and anti-nativism. Wolniewicz’s arguments are completely different: he recognizes the concept of equal repayment as the only concept of justice (rigoristic one) possible to be defended. His position is characterized by anti-meliorism and nativism. Finally, the problem of maintaining the concept of freedom and responsibility on the ground of radical anthropological nativism is taken up. The author evokes Elzenberg’s theory of tragedy to highlight the problem
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.