This article is a polemic with the article by Marian Przełęcki, O pewnych filozoficznych konsekwencjach semantycznej definicji prawdy published by “Studia Filozoficzne” 6, 1973. Przełęcki claimed that certain evaluative propositions have a logical value by virtue of containing evaluative predicates which are commonly understood. The functioning of these predicates in natural languages makes it possible to identify their denotation in these languages, and thus it is possible to assign logical values to the propositions that predicate about different elements of the (...) world their values in all cases when these elements do not fall into the range of vagueness of the predicates used. The authors of the polemic points out that the propositions analysed by Przełęcki are in fact descriptive and not normative because their logical value is determined by a common understanding of the evaluative predicates which they contain. These propositions do not say what is morally good, but, what is commonly believed to be morally good. Consequently, the problem of logical value of evaluative propositions has not been settled in Przełęcki’s article, while the ascription of logical values to propositions belonging to descriptive ethics, which is the real subject matter of the article, hardly poses any questions. The authors of this polemic contend that it is not possible to settle the problem of logical value of evaluative propositions without an analysis of the meaning of evaluative predicates. (shrink)

Empirical knowledge can be divided into the following levels: direct experience, observational sentences, their generalizations and theories. Neither of those levels is the best in an absolute sense. There have been questions whether either of them is a scientific one, and the reasons of those doubts were different for each level. Different problems (including philosophical ones, for philosophy appeals to widely understood experience) could be considered on different levels. Which level is the most appropriate depends on the purpose of the (...) consideration. The paper shows some reasons for rooting the mind-body problem on the level of direct experience, and aims to describe the manner in which we experience our body-and-mind as a unity. Thus the problem itself proves to be only superficial. However this conclusion can only be reached in a reflection following the direct experience. (shrink)

The paper presents the main ideas of French conventionalism as represented by Duhem, Poincaré and Le Roy. Clarified are some misunderstandings and misinterpretations on which the negative opinion on conventionalism is usually based. Conventionalism is presented as a source of the antipositivistic breakthrough. It thus led to the most important discussions in 20th century philosophy of science, which tended to undermine epistemological fundamentalism. The influence of conventionalism is shown - on European philosophy and specifically on Polish philosophy, especially on works (...) of K. Ajdukiewicz and his followers. (shrink)

The author is one of the pupils of Klemens Szaniawski. Szaniawski has lead a very active life as a scientist and a public activist. His public activity is quite well-known. His early period of life and scientific interests are not so well-known, however. And it is these latter matters that the author focuses on in her paper.

The article refers to Helena Eilstein’s views: her analysis of biblical contradictions and a limited moral relativism (similar observations made by Leszek Kołakowski are also evoked). It classifies the types of contradictions found in the Bible and suggests how to deal with them. At times the conceptual apparatus created in the philosophy of science is used and a connection to scientific cognition is made, for foundations of philosophy of science can influence the attitude towards biblical contradictions. It emphasizes the role (...) of individual attitudes and the psychological conditionality of taking moral decisions, as well as the importance of shaping moral sensitivity. Metaphors play a double role in the Bible. Firstly, metaphorical interpretations eliminate contradictions. Secondly, metaphors are useful for shaping moral sensitivity. (shrink)

The paper is a reply to the polemic with my article "The Structure of Scientific Theories and Systems of Values", which presented a number of analogies between methodological and metaethical problems. These analogies can be seen if we acknowledge the information surplus of evaluative statements in comparison to normative statements (similarly in science theories are stronger than observational statements), which is indicated by the examples of actual moral questions. The basis for the polemic is the fact that its authors deny (...) the existence of this surplus, claiming that evaluations are equivalent to and not stronger than norms. Moreover, as they reduce metaethics to the issues of meaning, and methodology to the issues of justification, they have to deny the possibility of these two domains meeting on the ground of similar problems. The paper also illustrates the reasons for a modification of meanings of certain philosophical terms that appeared in my previous article. (shrink)

Usually axiological systems and scientific theories are contrasted with each other. Significant differences between them are stressed: scientific theories purport to describe the world, while axiological systems do not. There is no common agreement as to what the values are and where one can find them. Scientific theories can be justified by experience, whereas axiological systems cannot and theorists differ as to how they should be justified. Scientific theories are to be true and useful, but it is not clear how (...) axiological systems should be evaluated. As far as scientific theories are concerned, commonly accepted procedures of their formulation, verification and evaluation have been established, whereas there are no such procedures for axiological systems. All this is taken to show that scientific theories are much better off than axiological systems.Although there is no denying that scientific theories and axiological systems can be contrasted with each other, there are also some important similarities between them, which are rarely mentioned, however. The author demonstrates far reaching analogies between the structure of scientific theories and the structure of axiological systems. (shrink)

The present experiment investigated the relations of narcissism with social value orientation under façade conditions of testing communal or agentic traits. The results indicated that narcissism predicted less willingness to share resources with others and more competitive orientation in a façade communal condition compared to the remaining two conditions: control and agentic. The results confirm narcissistic disregard for communal domain and are consistent with the extended agency model of narcissism and the “success as a drawback” effect.

More Info: B. Plawgo, A. Grabska, M. Klimczuk-Kochańska, A. Klimczuk, J. Kierklo, J. Żynel-Etel, Startery podlaskiej gospodarki. Analiza gospodarczych obszarów wzrostu i innowacji województwa podlaskiego: sektor produkcji oprogramowania komputerowego (Podlasie economy starters. Analysis of economic growth and innovation areas of Podlaskie: software production sector), Wojewódzki Urząd Pracy w Białymstoku, Białystok 2011.

B. Plawgo, A. Grabska, M. Klimczuk-Kochańska, A. Klimczuk, J. Kierklo, J. Żynel-Etel, Startery podlaskiej gospodarki. Analiza gospodarczych obszarów wzrostu i innowacji województwa podlaskiego: sektor produkcji oprogramowania komputerowego, Wojewódzki Urz¸ad Pracy w Białymstoku, Białystok 2011.

Raport wydany został przez Stowarzyszenie "Miasta w Internecie". Jego celem jest opracowanie modelu i katalogu funkcjonalnych kompetencji cyfrowych. Przedstawia on analizȩ badań i literatury przedmiotu, taksonomie kompetencji cyfrowych oraz projekt pomiaru funkcjonalnych kompetencji cyfrowych. Raport powstał w ramach „Projektu systemowego - działania na rzecz rozwoju szerokopasmowego Internetu ", realizowanego przez Ministerstwo Administracji i Cyfryzacji oraz Stowarzyszenie „Miasta w Internecie" pod hasłem POLSKA CYFROWA RÓWNYCH SZANS.

SPIS TREŚCI Ryszard Moń Wstęp -/- Rozdział 1: Lękam się świata bez filozofii. O nieodzowności humanistyki w dobie techniki i globalizacji -/- 1.1 Konieczność filozofii 1.2 Narodziny sztuk wyzwolonych 1.3 Uniwersytet domem humanistyki 1.4 Upadek humanistyki 1.5 Uniwersytet – biznes i korporacyjna logika 1.6 Kognitywny kapitalizm 1.7 Złowroga moc etatyzmu 1.8 Pragmatyzm a ideały kształcenia 1.9 Demokracja – dialog, kultura, światopogląd 1.10 Humanistyka na straży demokracji 1.11 Edukacja filozoficzna w szkole 1.12 Podsumowanie – filozofia jako fundament -/- Rozdział 2: Czy (...) starożytna paideia może być alternatywą dla współczesnej pedagogiki? Antyczne metody wychowawcze i ich obecna rola -/- 2.1 Filozofia jako sposób życia 2.2 Rola ćwiczeń duchowych w paidei starożytnej Grecji oraz starożytnego Rzymu 2.3 Antyczna paideia a aktualne wzorce kształcenia -/- Rozdział 3: Problem ujawniania przez nauczyciela własnej tożsamości moralnej w nauczaniu etyki i filozofii -/- 3.1 Nauczyciel na lekcjach filozofii i etyki 3.2 Etyka, moralność i tożsamość 3.3 Matthew Lipmana filozofowanie z dziećmi i młodzieżą 3.4 Filozofia! Ale jaka? 3.5 Nauczyciel-filozof 3.6 Tożsamość moralna nauczyciela -/- Rozdział 4: Język i filozofia. O Naturalnym Metajęzyku Semantycznym i jego związkach z filozofią -/- 4.1 Naturalny Metajęzyk Semantyczny – rozważania wstępne 4.2 Inspiracje filozoficzne koncepcji NMS 4.3 Naturalny Metajęzyk Semantyczny – cel i założenia koncepcji 4.4 Kierunki rozwoju NMS 4.5 Jak wykorzystać NMS w dydaktyce filozofii? -/- Rozdział 5: Metody problemowe na lekcji etyki i filozofii jako możliwe działanie prewencyjne -/- 5.1 Metody rozwiązywania problemów – informacje ogólne 5.2 Rozwiązywanie problemów poznawczych 5.3 Rozwiązywanie problemów decyzyjnych 5.4 Rozwiązywanie problemów praktycznych 5.5 Nauczanie i uczenie się metodą „układanki” 5.6 Metoda wychowania bez porażek 5.7 Rola nauczyciela 5.8 Kształcenie umiejętności rozwiązywania problemów 5.9 Oceny i wartościowania 5.10 Podsumowanie Rozdział 6: Trudności w uczeniu się – profilaktyka i terapia -/- 6.1 Trudności w uczeniu się 6.2 Specyficzne trudności w uczeniu się 6.3 Niepowodzenia szkolne 6.4 Profilaktyka i terapia -/- Aneks – konspekty lekcji o tematyce filozoficznej i etycznej. (shrink)

The linguistic studies written by Anna Wierzbicka have been an occasion for the remarks on the relationship between linguistics and philosophy and for the question whether linguistic enquiries entitle us to put forward philosophical theses. In particular, whether and to what extent we indeed learn something philosophically significant about the world (of culture) and the nature man and his mind by examining language. Defining here position as interdisciplinary, Wierzbicka draws on the studies of the relationship between language and culture, (...) language and mind (language is a mirror of the mind - Leibniz). She claims that philosophy can be made a reliable science, provided it is based on linguistics, and the results of linguistic analyses can be found at the grounds of philosophical theses. Such philosophical references are A. Wierzbicka\'s attempts to combine semantics with generativism (Chomsky). Her intention to bring about a holistic description of language through defining elementary expressions (concepts, meanings), the so-called indefinibilia (\"primitives\") can also be called philosophical in character. They suffice to define all the remaining expressions, and basic universal syntactic constructs in the form of a grammar of elementary units, i.e. the ways of combining elementary units into greater wholes. We think that Wierzbicka\'s procedure, her quest after primary elements (of language) are reducing. A. Wierzbicka\'s main idea, with regard to the relationship between language and mind, may be understood as follows: this is a Janus-faced relationship - one face (empirically accessible) is language, the other one is the mind accessible through investigations on language. Both \"faces\" (spheres) are somehow functionally \"glued together\". In fact, however, Wierzbicka speaks little about the philosophically comprehended nature of man, whereas she speaks much about linguistic varieties and similarities among people. Generally speaking, while she declares herself to be a linguist, she has a philosophical temper and ambitions to generalise, i.e. she conducts linguistic studies with an intention to arrive at philosophical theses (by examining language she wants to obtain knowledge about the world and man). She issues statements which go beyond a purely linguistic knowledge and strictly linguistic data, hence they are not made legitimate by the linguistic material itself. A. Wierzbicka does not explain in more detail her way of understanding philosophy, assuming its intuitive comprehension. From some contexts it can be deduced that she takes it to mean a worldview. Should we call some parts of her reasoning a philosophy, it is then not a realistic philosophy but subject-oriented (first-person philosophising), such that touches upon the problems of the borderline between linguistics and philosophy, more concerned with the axis language-user than language-the world. Simultaneously, it is a non-demarcated and non-autonomic philosophising, exactly within the context of science, for it takes advantage of the results of empirical sciences to pose philosophical theses. The belief that philosophy can be pursued within a linguistic context coincides with the approach of analytical philosophy with its linguistic turn. Despite her declarations to make philosophy more scientific, Wierzbicka\'s arguments on behalf of the generalised (philosophical) theses are more their illustration and explication than a decisive legitimacy. Her belief that one can find some common, primitive linguistic units (simplicia) in the form of a complete set of independent concepts for all languages of the world seems Utopian. It is difficult to do it even in deductive systems, constructed by way of the axiomatic method and with a finite set of initial expressions. (shrink)

Tytuł artykułu ma charakter prowokacyjny. Autorka nie uważa bynajmniej, by prawda mogła działać poprzez przemoc czy przez przemoc się wyrażać. A jednak ci, którzy odwołują się do ponadczasowych, naturalnych prawd na temat człowieka, życia i kwestii moralnych, bywają oskarżani o przemoc i demagogię. Owszem, bezsprzecznie można dostrzec związki między prawdą a przemocą, ale dotyczą one zwłaszcza prób bezprecedensowych manipulacji wymierzonych w prawdę. Kwestionuje się dziś powszechnie prawdę na temat kondycji człowieka, wartości moralnych, powinności obywatelskich a nawet faktów historycznych. Przemoc może (...) odgrywać niebagatelną rolę w procesie tworzenia czy poznania, wpływa także na przemiany wiedzy i jej przekaz w społecznym obiegu, na co w swoich pracach zwraca uwagę m.in. Andrzej Zybertowicz. Współcześnie uważa się, że zamiast o prawdzie powinniśmy mówić o wielości indywidualnych narracji, mnogości skrajnie subiektywistycznych interpretacji, z których wszystkie są równouprawnione. Sama prawda zostaje sprowadzona do dowolnie ustalanego produktu władzy – również tej, którą dzierżą środki masowego przekazu. Przeciwwagą dla takiego myślenia jest nauczanie Jana Pawła II, który w wyważony sposób przypomina nam o związkach prawdy z wolnością i o odpowiedzialności, jaką prawda generuje. Jest bowiem ściśle etyczną kwestią jaką postawę człowiek przyjmie wobec prawdy i czy gotów będzie jej służyć. To zdumiewające, iż dla wielu ludzi prawda zamiast z wyzwoleniem, kojarzy się ze zniewoleniem. Autorka podejmuje próbę wyjaśnienia jakie są przyczyny tego niepokojącego zjawiska i w jaki sposób nauczanie Jana Pawła II może pomóc nam ujrzeć właściwą perspektywę znaczenia prawdy w życiu człowieka, zarówno w wymiarze jednostkowej świadomości, jak też zbiorowego doświadczenia narodu czy całej ludzkości. W swoim artykule odwołuje się do stanowiska wyrażonego zarówno w encyklice "Veritatis Splendor", jak i w kontekście innych prac Jana Pawła II. (shrink)

Mental state reasoning or theory-of-mind has been the subject of a rich body of imaging research. Although such investigations routinely tap a common set of regions, the precise function of each area remains a contentious matter. With the help of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we sought to determine which areas are involved when processing mental state or intentional metarepresentations by focusing on the relational aspect of such representations. Using non-intentional relational representations such as spatial relations between persons and between (...) objects as a contrast, the results ascertained the involvement of the precuneus, the temporal poles, and the medial prefrontal cortex in the processing of intentional representations. In contrast, the anterior superior temporal sulcus and the left temporo-parietal junction were implicated when processing representations that refer to the presence of persons in relational contexts in general. The right temporo-parietal junction, however, was specifically activated for persons entering spatial relations. The level of representational complexity, a previously unexplored factor, was also found to modulate the neural response in some brain regions, such as the medial prefrontal cortex and the right temporo-parietal junction. These findings highlight the need to take into account the critical roles played by an extensive network of neural regions during mental state reasoning. (shrink)

The paper is a reply to M. Trybulec's polemics Incommensurability vs Linguistic Relativity against A. Jedynak's views on linguistic relativism. Some points of Trybulec's paper are very unclear, others mistaken, however still others express quite interesting intuitions, worthy of further investigation. The latter have actually been put forth by A. Jedynak in her earlier book and paper, and can be expressed as follows: there are different levels of meaning and of translations; linguistic relativism should take this into account; (...) the differences between languages most difficult to overcome are of pragmatical and not semantical nature. (shrink)

The paper presents different criteria of meaning formulated on the ground of contemporary empiricism, and shows their shortcomings. None of them respects all intuitions that empiricists have connected with the notion of meaning. The main thesis is that these intuitions can never be respected conjointly, for some of them exclude others. Consequently it is showed that the perfect empirical criterion of meaning does not exist.

The aim of the paper is to show the value of the reasonings guided by questions based on uncertain assumptions. The notion of a properly asked question is being redefined to include questions based on uncertain assumptions. As a result, the classification of simple reasonings, originally set up by K. Ajdukiewicz, is presented as more detailed. Moreover, the paper sets up the classification of complex reasonings.

Predictiveness (or testability) can be ascribed to empirical hypotheses in different degrees. Seven reasons why predictiveness is gradable are outlined. They are reflected in seven ways in which hypotheses can be compared according to the degree of their predictiveness. Hence additional specifications are required to accept predictiveness as a criterion of whether given hypotheses are scientific. Generally speaking a new hypothesis has little, if any, predictive power. Its predictive power will increase as science progresses. Specific problems arise when the predictive (...) power is expected from social sciences. (shrink)

The rationalisation of language is, according to K. Ajdukiewicz, a developmental tendency of the language, which inevitably accompanies the development of empirical knowledge. It is the transformation of well-established empirical generalisations into language axioms. It is accompanied by the reinforcement of contents of notions and by enriching the meaning-relations between expressions. Rationalisation results in sharpening as well as narrowing of the cognitive perspective. Inner inconsistency of linguistic rules may then occur, and it is apparent in the new type of experiences. (...) It is hollowed by a radical change of scientific theory; this change relates not only to statements, but also to the content of notions. The development and the change of the paradigmas in Kuhn's philosophy has similar character. (shrink)

According to linguistic relativism, we acquire knowledge about the world through language and thus the use of different languages results in different visions of the world. This view is sometimes supported by a statement saying that some of those visions are mutually inconsistent and they cannot be accepted simultaneously: the use of one of them is inconsistent with the use of the other. The paper discusses this statement referring to an example of languages of two logical calculi, and shows it (...) to be an overstatement. Theses of different languages are not inconsistent, for they are based on different concepts. Concepts, needed for negating theses expressed in either language, cannot be found in the other one. The paper therefore poses a question whether it is possible to compile conceptual apparatuses of languages which are believed to be incommensurable. It concludes that in fact there are no logical obstacles. Such languages can be used together without the risk of cognitive conflict. However, it can be difficult due to pragmatic reasons. Although this would not undermine the beliefs of people using the broadened language, it could undermine some of their values and attitudes. This way broadening of the cognitive perspective by compiling conceptual apparatuses of different languages is likely to weaken those attitudes towards reality, from which the languages in question originated. (shrink)

The limits of science change primarily as a result of new discoveries. But there can be other reasons, of a conceptual and/or methodological nature. The essence and structure of science can be understood differently, which results in different definitions of its limits. The text discusses some areas in which the limits of science were defined differently. Firstly, on the grounds of logical empiricism, views distant from direct experience, as generalisations and theories, have been excluded from science, narrowing its limits. Secondly, (...) the lack of an unshakable and strictly empirical basis has been found within the limits of science, while previously that basis was thought necessary. Thus, the limits of science were again found narrowed. Thirdly, previously neglected and rather unwanted evaluative elements have been repeatedly discovered at the base of science. It was claimed to sanction them within the limits of science. In that case the latter per se would not change their range, however their concept would have to broaden. Last but not least, for various and not necessarily intentional reasons, the limits of science has become vague. (shrink)

The paper gives a short outline of the problem of non-monotonic reasonings and suggests to consider them in the pragmatic context of the reasoner's beliefs, espe-cially - to interpret them as enthymemes.

The starting point of the investigations undertaken in the article is the thesis of empirical indeterminacy of scientific theories. According to this thesis the same set of empirical data can be differently explained by different theories, none of which will be found compelling. The reason for that is that no specific theory is a logical consequence of observational statements. This thesis can be so generalized as to include systems of value as well. Theoretical statements serve as justification of observational statements, (...) although the former are not entailed by the latter. Similarly with judgements of value: they justify moral norms but are not entailed by them. Consequently the same obligations can be justified on the grounds of different systems of value. Systems of value are not therefore determined by moral obligations and have the same function in ethics as theory does in science. Systems of value remain, however, radically different from scientific theories because the relations that bind observational statements with scientific observations are quite different from those that bind moral norms with human behaviour in ethics. (shrink)