{"title":"Konferencja: Wszyscy jesteśmy filozofami. Kraków, 13–14 grudnia 2017","authors":"Karol Petryszak","doi":"10.15633/R.2450","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15633/R.2450","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":308936,"journal":{"name":"Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129924584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article is a brief comparative work, whose subject are two different speculative myths. The first is the myth of English theologian Alan Watts; the second – the Jewish philosopher Hans Jonas. Both myths refer to the issues of theodicy. This article attempts to present the main thesis of both myths. Furthermore, it shows the specific role of a myth in the context of issues of theodicy.
{"title":"Hans Jonas i Alan Watts: teodycea a mit spekulatywny","authors":"Łukasz Mazur","doi":"10.15633/r.2444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15633/r.2444","url":null,"abstract":"The article is a brief comparative work, whose subject are two different speculative myths. The first is the myth of English theologian Alan Watts; the second – the Jewish philosopher Hans Jonas. Both myths refer to the issues of theodicy. This article attempts to present the main thesis of both myths. Furthermore, it shows the specific role of a myth in the context of issues of theodicy.","PeriodicalId":308936,"journal":{"name":"Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123852347","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The essay aims at presenting original ideas of Boguslaw Wolniewicz in the field of modal logic, which improve the traditional theodicy, criticized by Pierre Bayle. The classical theodicy attempts to reconcile divine omnipotence and God’s goodness. According to classical theodicy both of these elements can be reconciled, because evil is not the work of God, but a work of man – freedom is in fact necessary for a man so that he could do good, but to do good, a person automatically has to be able to do the evil (understood morally, not physically). Bayle’s argument says that freedom implies the possibility of evil and it does not imply its existence, and this means that evil can be avoided even with the assumption of freedom. Wolniewicz tries to refute that argument. He quotes a little known definitions of possibility derived from the logic of Megarian. It turns out to be an inspiration for him to introduce an original definition of possibility – “what is possible = what happened or what will happen in the future.” With this interpretation of possibility classic theodicy seems to be efficient.
{"title":"Teodycea a logika modalna. Bogusława Wolniewicza polemika z krytyką teodycei u Pierre’a Bayle’a","authors":"Mateusz Mirosławski","doi":"10.15633/r.2443","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15633/r.2443","url":null,"abstract":"The essay aims at presenting original ideas of Boguslaw Wolniewicz in the field of modal logic, which improve the traditional theodicy, criticized by Pierre Bayle. The classical theodicy attempts to reconcile divine omnipotence and God’s goodness. According to classical theodicy both of these elements can be reconciled, because evil is not the work of God, but a work of man – freedom is in fact necessary for a man so that he could do good, but to do good, a person automatically has to be able to do the evil (understood morally, not physically). Bayle’s argument says that freedom implies the possibility of evil and it does not imply its existence, and this means that evil can be avoided even with the assumption of freedom. Wolniewicz tries to refute that argument. He quotes a little known definitions of possibility derived from the logic of Megarian. It turns out to be an inspiration for him to introduce an original definition of possibility – “what is possible = what happened or what will happen in the future.” With this interpretation of possibility classic theodicy seems to be efficient.","PeriodicalId":308936,"journal":{"name":"Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115021905","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article concerns one of the possible solutions of the problem of natural evil. This solution is based on an assumption that there is fortuity and chaos in the world, i.e. God has no total control over the world. Statements of this kind may be found in the works of following authors: Harold S. Kushner, John C. Polkinghorne, Gisbert Greshake. The article contains an interpretation saying that the absence of God’s control serves human creativity. Possible objections towards this concept are analyzed.
{"title":"Świat poza boską kontrolą. Jedna z odpowiedzi na problem zła naturalnego","authors":"M. Trzcińska","doi":"10.15633/R.2442","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15633/R.2442","url":null,"abstract":"The article concerns one of the possible solutions of the problem of natural evil. This solution is based on an assumption that there is fortuity and chaos in the world, i.e. God has no total control over the world. Statements of this kind may be found in the works of following authors: Harold S. Kushner, John C. Polkinghorne, Gisbert Greshake. The article contains an interpretation saying that the absence of God’s control serves human creativity. Possible objections towards this concept are analyzed.","PeriodicalId":308936,"journal":{"name":"Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122105034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"„Religia Natury”. O relacji człowiek–przyroda","authors":"M. Twardowski","doi":"10.15633/R.2449","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15633/R.2449","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":308936,"journal":{"name":"Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116865682","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The goal of this paper is to identify deficiencies of Roman Ingarden’s concept of responsibility. It points to a couple of illegitimate assumptions made by Ingarden. Moreover, in the place of rejected elements of his analyses, it proposes supplements coherent to Ingarden’s further line of thought. One of these proposed supplements is an attempt to introduce a category of “fundamental responsibility” which is ontically fundamental.
{"title":"Krytyka i propozycje rozszerzenia ontycznych podstaw odpowiedzialności Romana Ingardena","authors":"Karol Petryszak","doi":"10.15633/r.2447","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15633/r.2447","url":null,"abstract":"The goal of this paper is to identify deficiencies of Roman Ingarden’s concept of responsibility. It points to a couple of illegitimate assumptions made by Ingarden. Moreover, in the place of rejected elements of his analyses, it proposes supplements coherent to Ingarden’s further line of thought. One of these proposed supplements is an attempt to introduce a category of “fundamental responsibility” which is ontically fundamental.","PeriodicalId":308936,"journal":{"name":"Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122263031","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article recounts about Jan III Sobieski’s epistles from 1655–1683 which were written to his wife Maria Kazimiera d’Arquien. The division of listing’s model, which was made by Robert Ganszyniec, and the framing of letters’ type according to Stefania Skwarczynska were taken as a basis in creation of interesting epistolographic convection category typical for Sobieski. Furthermore the text reveals the manner in which Sobieski reaches a directness of the statements as well as the themes which dominate in his letters and the way of taboo implementation. However, the article does not present the letters in detachment with historical and socio-cultural reality. The correspondence of Jan and Maria Sobieski is not only an evidence of great love but also reveals historical events from the participants’ perspective with signs of baroque. The article includes many citations from epistles written by Jan III Sobieski in order to present the reader the discussed issues sufficiently. It also presents the stand of the most accomplished literary historians such as Stefania Skwarczynska, Alojzy Sajkowski or Leszek Kukulski.
这篇文章讲述了索比斯基三世在1655年至1683年间写给妻子玛丽亚·卡齐米耶拉·阿奎因的书信。Robert Ganszyniec对listing模型的划分和Stefania Skwarczynska对字母类型的框架被作为Sobieski典型的有趣的书信对流分类的基础。此外，文本还揭示了索别斯基的直接表述方式以及在他的信件中占主导地位的主题以及禁忌实施的方式。然而，文章并没有脱离历史和社会文化现实来呈现这些信件。简·索比斯基和玛丽亚·索比斯基的通信不仅是伟大爱情的证据，而且从参与者的角度揭示了具有巴洛克风格的历史事件。文章包括许多引用从书信写的Jan III Sobieski为了呈现读者充分讨论的问题。它还展示了最具成就的文学史学家的立场，如斯特法尼亚·斯克瓦尔-琴斯卡、阿洛伊齐·萨伊科夫斯基或莱谢克·库库尔斯基。
{"title":"Konwencja epistolograficzna i bezpośredniość wyrazu w listach Jana III Sobieskiego do Marysieńki","authors":"Weronika Kosmalska","doi":"10.15633/r.2446","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15633/r.2446","url":null,"abstract":"The article recounts about Jan III Sobieski’s epistles from 1655–1683 which were written to his wife Maria Kazimiera d’Arquien. The division of listing’s model, which was made by Robert Ganszyniec, and the framing of letters’ type according to Stefania Skwarczynska were taken as a basis in creation of interesting epistolographic convection category typical for Sobieski. Furthermore the text reveals the manner in which Sobieski reaches a directness of the statements as well as the themes which dominate in his letters and the way of taboo implementation. However, the article does not present the letters in detachment with historical and socio-cultural reality. The correspondence of Jan and Maria Sobieski is not only an evidence of great love but also reveals historical events from the participants’ perspective with signs of baroque. The article includes many citations from epistles written by Jan III Sobieski in order to present the reader the discussed issues sufficiently. It also presents the stand of the most accomplished literary historians such as Stefania Skwarczynska, Alojzy Sajkowski or Leszek Kukulski.","PeriodicalId":308936,"journal":{"name":"Racjonalia. Z punktu widzenia humanistyki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127554636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：