To be scientific, ethics must not include statements that are derived in any manner other than ethical reasoning from axioms or facts. But on this road it cannot arrive at norms, at rules of conduct. Contrary to the common view, no science at all can give rules. Science says merely what is, and how it is, but not what ought to be. Norms, i.e. rules of conduct, follow not from theoretical studies but from the practical applications of the theoretical results. (...) Hygiene, for instance, indicates physical movement as an indispensable condition of maintaining health; but the norm “We ought to make physical exercises” originates from our concern with the important aim of maintaining our health. (shrink)
The correspondence between Meinong and Kazimierz Twardowski highlights the relationship between two philosophers who influenced the history of philosophy and psychology in Austria and Poland. The two correspondents discuss, among other things, their epistemological approach and the university politics of their times. In addition, there is an extensive introduction that places the correspondence in its proper historical and philosophical context.
The concept of free will has many different meanings: the author is concerned with one found in the controversy between determinism and indeterminism, which refers to our ability to reach independent decisions and judgements. He sides with determinism, believing that this position is more probably true, and undertakes to point out that the consequences of determinism, i.e. of the view that all our judgements are inevitably and sufficiently determined by our character and motives do not undermine ethics or penal code (...) although certain authors believe that they do. Indeterminism, on the other hand, by claiming that our judgements are not produced by external determinants leads to consequences that cannot be squared out with certain assumptions of ethics and law. His argument is based on the scrutiny of reasoning presented by both sides of the controversy and on the analysis of psychological and ethical terms in which they are couched. (shrink)
The volume contains almost thirty papers by Kazimierz Twardowski , the founder of the Lvov-Warsaw School. The papers are published in English for the first time. The papers concern fundamental problems of philosophy: the methods of philosophizing, the boundary of psychology and semiotics, the conceptual apparatus of metaphysics, ethical skepticism, the question of free will and ethical obligation, the aesthetics of music and so on. The systematic considerations are complemented by concise but excellent sketches of the philosophical views of Socrates, (...) Aquinas, Leibniz, Spencer, Nietzsche, and Bergson. (shrink)
The text, first published here in virue of the survived original typescript, contains an outline of the sersies of lectures delivered by the founder of Lvov-Warsaw School in 1908 at John Casimir University. The notions like „thinking”, „presentation”, „memory”, „association” are objects of his minute inquiry.
This paper is a part of a series of lectures on logic delivered by Kazimierz Twardowski in the John Casimir University in Lvov during the first semester of the academic year 1902-1903. This publication of the paper is a hommage to the founder of Lvov-Warsaw School in the centenary of his first lecture in Lvov University.
In scientific ethics which is equivalent to the theory of human action analysed in terms of the value of goodness, researches tend to follow different directions depending on how its principal problems are solved. Thus, as regards the scope of procedure of ethical research, we can distinguish between individual and social ethics. The question about the source of morality is the point of departure of heteronomic and autonomous ethics. Different answers to the question about the ethical emotionalism or intellectualism, with (...) ethical rigorism as one of its variants. The answers to the problems involved in the ethical criterion, as far as its concerned, lead either to teleological or ateleological or nomical ethics. If it is thought necessary to justify some ethical criterion, the justifications tend either in the direction of ethical criterion is answered either in terms of absolutist or relativists ethics. Metascientific analyses of the cognitive status of ethics in turn provide the points for debates between those advocating the scientific nature of moral axiology and normative ethics and the followers of descriptive ethics. (shrink)