The Plurality of Realities' contains four texts by Leon Chwistek that deal with his original philosophical conception called the theory of plurality of realities. This collection is essential not only for understanding the full-fledged version of Chwistek's conception but also for surveying its development over a span of five years (1916-1921). Reading these essays in chronological order allows us to notice all stages of its development, beginning with its first sketches, drawn in the book Meaning and Reality, (...) where only two realities are considered, and finishing with Chwistek's most famous essay, The Plurality of Realities, in which he discusses four different realities: the reality of things, the reality of physics, the reality of impressions, and the reality of imaginations. The collection is preceded by two introductory essays by Karol Chrobak. The first presents Leon Chwistek against the background of the intellectual, cultural, and political life of the interwar period in Poland. The second focuses on Chwistek's conception of the plurality of realities and gives a critical account of its most widespread interpretations. Translated by Karol Chrobak. (shrink)

First published in 2000. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

t.1 • Nominalizm Poincare'go i jego konsekwencje • Paradoksy logistyki • Pojęcie rzeczywistości • Wielość rzeczywistości • Zastosowanie metody konstrukcyjnej do teorji poznania • Tragedja werbalnej metafizyki • Rola semantyki racjonalnej w filozofii • Rola zasady konsekwencji w zagadnieniu sprawiedliwości społecznej • Zagadnienia kultury duchowej w Polsce t.2 • Granice nauki. Zarys logiki i metodologji nauk ścisłych • Antynomje logiki formalnej • Zasady czystej teorji typów • Kilka uwag o podstawowych prawach rozchodzenia się światła • Liczby nieskończenie małe i ich (...) zastosowanie. (shrink)

The text is based on the unpublished notes from the lectures given by Chwistek in 1931 in Lvov.

Chaque science fondée sur des idées générales doit être relative. Il y a pourtant une science exacte qui n’est pas relative. C’est la sémantique rationnelle. Cette science concerne les expressions qu’on peut construire à l’aide de deux signes donnés d’avance. Elle n’admet que la notion de substitution, une notion élémentaire du type d’expression et les notions du calcul logique élémentaire. Elle nous met en état de construire un système de métamathé- matique symbolique qui embrasse les mathématiques entières. Elle nous fournit (...) les moyens d’une critique objective des notions philosophiques. (shrink)

Leon Chwistek's 1924 paper ?The Theory of Constructive Types? is cited in the list of recent ?contributions to mathematical logic? in the second edition of Principia Mathematica, yet its prefatory criticisms of the no-classes theory have been seldom noticed. This paper presents a transcription of the relevant section of Chwistek's paper, comments on the significance of his arguments, and traces the reception of the paper. It is suggested that while Russell was aware of Chwistek's points, they (...) were not important in leading him to the adoption of extensionality that marks the second edition of PM. Rudolf Carnap seems to have independently rediscovered Chwistek's issue about the scope of class expressions in identity contexts in his Meaning and Necessity in 1947. (shrink)

‘The Principles of the Pure Type Theory’ is a translation of Leon Chwistek's 1922 paper ‘Zasady czystej teorii typów’. It summarizes Chwistek's results from a series of studies of the logic of Whitehead and Russell's Principia Mathematica which were published between 1912 and 1924. Chwistek's main argument involves a criticism of the axiom of reducibility. Moreover, ‘The Principles of the Pure Type Theory’ is a source for Chwistek's views on an issue in Whitehead and Russell's (...) ‘no-class theory of classes’ involving the notion of ‘scope’. (shrink)

I explore Leon Chwistek’s views on ontology and aesthetics through a philosophical analysis of his texts. I present and briefly discuss two main interpretations of Chwistek’s ontology, i.e. logical and epistemological, before analyzing Chwistek’s aesthetics to show how it may be based on his ontology. Furthermore, I link both interpretations to the problem of whether or not Chwistek’s four realities share a common domain; a problem which is associated with his aesthetics. Finally, I make suggestions (...) regarding further research on his notion of transitional types of art and the corresponding realities. (shrink)

This is the first English translation of Leon Chwistek’s “Tragedia werbalnej metafizyki,” Kwartalnik Filozoficzny, Vol. X, 1932, 46–76. Chwistek offers a scathing critique of Roman Ingarden’s Das literarische Kunstwerk and of the entire Phenomenology movement. The text also contains many hints at Chwistek’s own philosophical and formal ideas. The book that Chwistek reviews attracted wide attention and was instrumental in winning Ingarden a position as Professor of Philosophy at the University of Lwów in 1933. (...) class='Hi'>Chwistek’s alienation from his fellow logicians of the Lvov-Warsaw school is clear from his ridicule of Leśniewski’s project. (shrink)

This paper focuses on the theory of plurality of realities introduced by Leon Chwistek. A critical analysis of this theory and an extensional interpretation of Chwistek’s axiomatic descriptions of four realities lead to an epistemological interpretation of this theory. The word “plurality” in the title is a result of different waysof understanding the same original set of sense-data. This interpretation is contrasted with Kazimierz Pasenkiewicz’s ontological version of this theory. In the final parts of the paper the (...) most important consequences of this theory are discussed. First, the ethical relativism postulated by Chwistek is criticized. Second, an attempt to illustrate the plurality of realities with an example of different styles of painting is discussed. Third, a critical rationalism in the form of a kind of practical attitude toward social reality, which results from the theory of plurality of realities, is outlined. (shrink)

Leon Chwistek był jednym z najważniejszych myślicieli w Polsce okresu międzywojennego. Będąc filozofem, logikiem, artystą i teoretykiem sztuki, niejednokrotnie komentował historyczne i współczesne sobie zjawiska życia artystycznego, a także formułował wyraziste poglądy na temat krytyki sztuki. Celem niniejszego artykułu jest syntetyczne omówienie tych poglądów i nakreślenie kontekstu, w jakim się one kształtowały. Tym samym w artykule autor odwołuje się nie tylko do osiągnięć teoretyczno-artystycznych Chwistka, ale również do jego filozofii i dokonań naukowych. W tym celu autor prezentuje kluczowe (...) zagadnienia krytyki sztuki Chwistka w układzie problemowym, przeprowadzając analizę treści wybranych wypowiedzi i nakreślając ich konteksty kulturowe. Omówione zostają kolejno następujące aspekty: miejsce krytyki artystycznej w ogólnie pojętym życiu kulturalnym Polski międzywojennej, doświadczenie jako podstawa sądu krytycznego, metodologia pracy krytyka sztuki, kryteria wartościowania dzieł sztuki i postaw twórczych. (shrink)

Everyone's favorite houseguest who never left, Leon Black (played by award-winning comedian JB Smoove on HBO's Curb Your Enthusiasm) drops his wisdom and good-bad advice for the masses. Learn the secrets Larry David has gleaned from the Falstaff of television."--Amazon.

The Hungry Soul is a fascinating exploration of the natural and cultural act of eating. Kass brilliantly reveals how the various aspects of this phenomenon, and the customs, rituals, and taboos surrounding it, relate to universal and profound truths about the human animal and its deepest yearnings. "Kass is a distinguished and graceful writer. . . . It is astonishing to discover how different is our world from that of the animals, even in that which most evidently betrays that we (...) too are animals--our need and desire for food."--Roger Scruton, Times Literary Supplement "Yum."--Miss Manners. (shrink)

It’s constitutive of classical theism that there is a necessarily existent personal god who is also the creator of the universe, where the latter claim includes at least the following three theses: (i) God is wholly distinct from the natural world; (ii) God is the originating or sustaining cause of the natural world; and (iii) God created the natural world ex nihilo, i.e., without the use of pre-existing materials. Call this tripartite component of classical theism the classical view of creation. (...) In this paper, I offer a new argument against classical theism. In particular, I argue that creation ex nihilo is prima facie impossible, and that since the doctrine of creation ex nihilo is constitutive of classical theism, classical theism is false. (shrink)