The study deals with a phenomenon of responsibility. It distinguishes between natural responsibility and moral responsibility or legal responsibility (liability). The central intention of the text is to reveal that responsibility does not refer only to moral or legal dimensions. The natural responsibility is greater (more important) than the moral responsibility or legal one. What is more, both the moral responsibility and the legal responsibility are changeable. The natural responsibility instead, is constant and concerns all the mankind in the same way.
Besides the impact that COVID-19 has had in the sanitary, political and economic domains, it has also triggered multiple discursive processes, what opens up the field for an analysis from sociosemiotics, the social science interested in the study of ‘meaning in action’. The aim of this article is to discuss from such a perspective how the current crisis linked to the COVID-19 virus has given place to the emergence of processes of narrative construction of an ‘Other’ to be blamed for the threat. While in some contexts the dominant narrative has been that COVID-19 is ‘the Chinese’ –and their unhealthy culinary habits– fault, in others the focus has been set on ‘the irresponsible’ that do not stay home when indicated to do so, as well as on ‘the posh’, given that they can afford travelling and hence can import the virus on their return. Departing from the premise which poses that cognition is articulated in narrative terms, the article argues how, in cases such as the current COVID-19 crisis, a discursive construction of collective actors by means of mechanisms of actorialization, generalization and axiologization is necessary for the dynamics of blame-attribution.
The article searches for the sources of guilt. It evokes Nietzsche’s notion of guilt as a derivative of unpaid mercantile debts. In opposition to this is Bouber’s socio-divine origin of fault. J. Tischner and J. Hołówka are also cited; they ascribe to guilt objective status. There is an important distinction between guilt and reconciliation, as well as a description of the possible contamination by guilt. The article also deals with Jasper's call to accept one’s own fault, otherwise there is a risk of trivialisation of life. The source of fault lies in relations between people and in the "point of holiness" mentioned by M. Blondel.
Artykuł porusza problematykę wzajemnych relacji między stroną podmiotową a winą w prawie karnym. W ramach analizy tych relacji naświetlone zostają dotychczasowe poszczególne teorie winy. Autorka artykułu podejmuje ponadto próbę uchwycenia istoty winy w oparciu o badania z dziedziny psychologii i filozofii. Poczynione w artykule ustalenia w przedmiocie winy zostały następnie zestawione z pojęciem strony podmiotowej w polskim prawie karnym.
EN
The article discusses the issue of mutual relations between the subjective side and the guilt in criminal law. As part of the analysis of these relations, the theories of guilt are highlighted. Moreover author attempts to establish the essence of guilt basing on psychological and philosophical findings. Conclusions about guilt made in article are then compared with the notion of the subjective side in Polish criminal law.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.