Limonov’s character adores to be different, he loves to shock people. He lives then with kind of an other life. From one side it gives to him a hallmark of singularities and uniquenesses, from other it is underlining intuitive - ness, which is such important to him as the base of knowledge and reasoning. This philosophy is meeting all requirements of Eddie’s “life philosophy”. Empirical knowledge the own soul, and also souls of other people is leading him to height of the success and the vital fulfilment in own antrophosphere, own existence, time and space. Ediczka is standing out, he is “different”. However the most important is fact, that Eddie - character is the same as Limonov - writer. The life and the existence of the character are becoming author’s being at the same time. There is no Eddie's existence without existing of his author - Limonov. Eduard Limonov antrophosphere’s multidimensionality has reflection in the Eddie’s form. Character, similarly as his author, is a writer, publicist, rebellious critic of political world’s order (especially his two “homelands” - America and the USSR). Analysing interviews with Limonov a striking similarity of both figures views is noticed. Tragedy of the man left by “mother - Russia” and thrown to “orphanage - America” is becoming from one side - more definitive, from second- highly deceptive and seeming.
The dispute over German past is not reserved for historians only. You can find both “advocates of German guilt” and “bards of German suffering” (Aleida Assmann) among many German writers. In the following article I ana-lyze essays by Maxim Biller and Bernhard Schlink – authors who each has differ-ent views on such a painful for Germans past.
Maksym Gorkij (1868-1936) – known Russian writer, dramaturge and prose writer, who gained fame not only in Russia, but also abroad. He spent many years in exile. He was nominated for the Noble Prize. In 1902 in press ap-peared performance “The lower depths”, which holds a special place in artistic work of the author. It is a kind of fable about true and different attitude to it. The reader asks yourself question, what is better: bitter truth or sweet lie ?
I my work I refer to separated in literary discourse from the wide range of non-fiction literature literary witness. Both types of literature from the assumption refer to authentic events and include truthful style of perception. In my article I try to investigate weather there are any differences between the truth of literature of fact and the truth literary witness on selected texts of three authors: Chaim Grade, Józef Mackiewicz i Czesław Miłosz.I must be pointed that literary witness in the first place struggling with specifying of the inner truth of the main character, who experienced a borderline situation. Literature of fact is a transcription of a story of an eyewitness, who forwards the truth of the events.
The article attempts to contribute to the discussion on the methods used in creating the world in the media, viewed from the rhetorical perspective. Implementations of the rhetorical principle of the adaptation of the utterance to the context and the situation of the audience to which exposition is directed (cf. K. Burke’s idea of identification and the so-called “identification” principle) are followed by both linguistic structuring of the utterance and the following argumentation may effect in the media content messages that are not only different but, frequently, create opposing images of the world. How far they may differ in their message is then shown with the example of the media reception of the death and the burial of Czesław Miłosz manifested in the presentations offered by two daily newspapers: Gazeta Wyborcza and Nasz Dziennik. The excerpted source material shows how the multitude of receivers designed to be reached by different mass media communication channels and diversity in taste and expectations of audiences makes it possible for journalists to create subjective interpretations of the world. Once created and tailored to the context of the audience, they function in parallel pathways and, should a clash between them ensue, the only outcome is that their rhetorical nature gets even more accentuated. With these circumstances given, what we experience then is a situation when different truths collide, while each of them surfaces within a given context of human conversation and each is validated by its respective audience to be reached and goals to be attained.
Montaigne is widely regarded as one of the most significant sceptics of the 16th century. His most important work, Essays, had a great impact on the thinkers of the 16th and 17th centuries, in particular on the philosophy of Descartes. The article presents Montaigne’s critique of senses and reason as sources of human knowledge. The elements of his scepticism that went beyond the sceptic arguments of ancient thinkers has been emphasized. The negative role of his ontological variabilism in knowing things has been underlined. As a result of the total criticism of the possibilities of human cognition made by the author of the Essays, attention has been paid to the non-sceptical type of the question posed by him: “What do I know?” (“Que sais-je?”). The answer to this question led him to fideism in cognition. At the end of the article, an attempt has been made to indicate Montaigne’s main epistemological and metaphysical assumptions that contributed to the problem of cognition. It has also been highlighted in what way the understanding of reason, method, and, above all, self became for Descartes, unlike Montaigne, the foundation of certain knowledge.
This paper aims to analyse and evaluate the character and role of sense perception in the works of Anselm of Canterbury written during the relatively short period of the 1070s and 1080s, namely the Monologion, the Proslogion (including the responses to the objections raised by monk Gaunilo), and De veritate. First, attention is devoted to sense perception in God – whether God possesses this kind of knowledge and whether God can be said to have sensually perceivable characteristics. The subsequent parts examine sense perception in the context of human knowledge on two levels: 1. human sensory knowledge and its role in understanding God (i.e., whether the senses are useful in any way in the struggle to find God) and 2. sensory knowledge and its truthfulness (including sensory illusions). Lastly, an attempt is made to explain why Anselm paid such little attention to sensory perception, even though it seems, according to the analysed texts, that the senses played an important and irreplaceable role in his noetic endeavour.
The article focuses on the relation between speech and truth, elaborated by Heidegger in the period of Being and Time. It argues that Heidegger’s notion of truth is a deeply linguistic one. The basic language unity is not the proposition (statement), but the situated act of speech. The author reconstructs Heidegger’s reading of the Aristotelian theory of statement as well as Heidegger’s appropriation of Husserl’s analysis of truth. The conclusion arrived at is that if speech is in early Heidegger to be true, it must be context-bound and interpretative.
The article addresses the issue of lie and its detection in criminal proceedings, with particular focus on evaluating truthfulness and credibility of utterances made by the participants in criminal proceedings. It is a relatively new area of research which is of a significant importance for establishing the truth both in inquiry and in court practice. An application of new information technology solutions such as, inter alia, e-minutes serves this purpose.
In this article we refl ect on the theoretical foundations of Jerzy Topolski’s history of historiography. In the fi rst part of the text, entitled “On truth in historiography – pragmatically and idealistically,” Maria Solarska shows the relationship between Topolski’s theory of truth and his view of the community of historians, of that community’s methodological and ethical rules. In the second part of the text, “Historiography between truth and myth,” Maciej Bugajewski raises a question about Topolski’s defi nition of the diff erence between truth and myth. In our opinion Topolski wanted to see the history of historiography as the history of truth about the past.
John Paul II in his teaching about Poland and patriotism defines Poland as a “special mother”. It is due to the fact that the Pope places Polish patriotism within the broad perspective of pondering upon human being, his/her dignity and the freedom. Pope’s encyclicals are the starting point of this conceptualization. Here the encyclical Veritatis splendor (the Splendor of Truth) by John Paul II released in 1993 deserves the special attention. Its basic thesis is : a man should base his collective life upon permanent, objective values; upon “the truth”. Modern Europe is the ethical individualism; subjectivism and relativism. It is characterized by the “crisis of the sense”. The Polish culture is expressed by the assumption of the existence of permanent values, which should be the foundation of human community. Europe needs Poland. According to John Paul II Polish patriotism is the “love” towards something that constitutes the essence of its culture, its message. And this means that it is for each of us a “special mother”. However, this message has a universal value.
In this paper, I discuss the interpretation of the method of deconstruction in David J. Gunkel’s Deconstruction (MIT Press 2021). I focus on the relationship between deconstruction and truth. I hold that the concept of truth is indispensable for deconstruction since truth introduces correctness conditions for the deconstructive method. However, I claim that truth, being essential and primitive for deconstruction, is fundamentally inaccessible for being analyzed by the latter.
Artykuł sugeruje taką lekturę dwóch poematów heroikomicznych Ignacego Krasickiego, "Monachomachii" i "Antymonachomachii", która – zapewne w zgodzie z intencją poety – odsuwa na dalszy plan ich ewentualną wymowę satyryczną w odniesieniu do środowiska zakonnego. Eksponuje zaś ich mistrzostwo artystyczne, wciąż żywy komizm, złożoność relacji komunikacyjnych czy intertekstualność. Autor artykułu pokazuje podobieństwa i różnice między tymi utworami, podkreślając, że pierwszy z nich i jego recepcja stanowią temat drugiego. Przede wszystkim jednak uwaga skupia się tu na zaprezentowanej w poematach postawie poety wobec świata, która ujawnia wielorakie odczucie niezgodności – np. między językiem a rzeczywistością, przyczyną/zamiarem a skutkiem – nierzadko także absurdalności i nieprzezwyciężalnej śmieszności ludzkich postaw. Jako kluczowe jawi się też tutaj, szczególnie w przypadku "Antymonachomachii", różnie ujęte zagadnienie prawdy.
EN
The paper suggests such a reading of Ignacy Krasicki’s two mock heroic poems, namely "Monachomachia" and "Antymonachomachia" ("Antimonachomachia") that, probably in accordance with the poet’s intention, moves the pieces’ allegedly satirical meaning in reference to the monk society to the background, and exhibits their artistic mastery, still vivid comedy, complexity of communicative and intertextual relationships. The author of the article shows the similarities and differences between the pieces, marking that the first piece and its reception is the theme of the second. Above all, however, attention is focused on the present in the poems attitude of the poet to the world which reveals manifold feeling of disagreement, e.g. between language and reality, cause/intention and effect, oftentimes also the absurdity and unsurpassed ridiculousness of human stances. The key factor here is also, especially in the case of "Antymonachomachia," variously conceived truth.
The undertaken considerations seek for revealing that in the thought of Plato there are few different approaches to the problem of truth. They start with the epistemological aspect which was inherited by Plato from Parmenides according to which truth is a constitutive element of human cognition and knowledge, an element that is conditioned by precisely determined indicators such as universality, necessity and invariability. The important contribution of Plato in explaining the problem of truth is where he underlines its meaning in the accomplishment of human being. The natural ability for knowing truth is the most crucial expression of humanity that is why more he draws on truth more he exists.
The interesting problem of the Book of Job is the „sin” of Job’s friends. What wrong did they say that Job was to pray that God would forgive them? Why their sober words were considered by God as sinful while Job’s speeches, full of anger, were judged as proper? The answer lies in the context - not in the text only.
The teaching of the Church speaks of the attitude of joy resulting from the redemption, but the literature on joy is not rich. In theological studies the concept of joy is associated with various God’s actions, which a person can take on such an attitude. The elaboration of the described subject was based on the teaching of Pope Paul VI in the apostolic exhortation „Gaudete in Domino” addressed to bishops, priests and faithful of the entire Catholic world about Christian joy in 1975, the richest and most complete expression of the Church on joy. Also in the teaching and statements of successive popes (St. John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francis), for whom also the concept of joy and the Christian attitude of joy is a testimony of faith and trust in God. It is the direct and unadulterated Gospel, „Joyful News”, the evangelization of life immersed in God. The successors of apostle Peter, disciple of Jesus, the propagator of joy flowing from the personal meeting of Jesus. A witness to his life, miracles. He who betrayed and whom he was forgiven. Who, unflinchingly, in the power of the Holy Spirit, preaches the teaching of Jesus Christ. Church shepherds show the essence of Christian joy based on faith, hope and love, which source is God. They show the biblical dimension of the joy, its manifestations in the history of the Chosen People, in the life of Jesus, the original Church, Mary and saints. They do not cease to show the practical implementation of Christian joy in the life of every human being, seeking to develop indications for the moral life of Christians by listening to the word of God, meeting God in the sacraments and doing good.
Th is article is an att empt to show a possible way to fi nd out, what kind of rationality characterizes history. It bases on philosophical assumption that idea of rationality is always directly connected with idea of truth. Th is connection was presented in the article as an argument for treating the notion of historical truth as the right basis for analyze rationality of history. In light of modern theory of history, historical truth can be see from angle of the notion of truth proposed by Hilary Putnam and Willard Van Orman Quine. It means that it can be understand as the internal truth: truth dependent on its context. In accordance with main assumption, this fact allows history to try to think about its own rationality in similar way: to defi ne it as internal (contextual) rationality, which accurately mirrors the individual character of historical cognition. Th e article points out theoretical problems potentially connected with above conception of rationality. Question, whether history has ability to analyze the rationality by its own instruments, was underlined as one of the most important.
This paper contributes to the discussion of Heidegger’s conception of statement which rejects the classical understanding of it as being the automatic place of truth and reveals it to be a phenomenon rooted in much deeper hermeneutical and, above all, temporal structures. The article systematises Heidegger’s conception of the three conditions for the untruthfulness of a statement in relation to its primary, that is apophantic, function. The conclusion is a fundamentally ontological conception of the statement which can be applied to the traditional dispute between Russell and Strawson about the statement the current king of France is bald. Fundamental ontology also reveals how the starting point of this dispute is incorrect. If one had to say that one said was right, however, truth would be closer to Russell and not to Strawson, as it is generally thought nowadays.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.