This article seeks to interpret the striking divergence between the two judgments passed by the European Court of Human Rights in the Lautsi v Italy case in terms of value pluralism. The latter is a hotly debated position in ethics, brought to life in the second half of the twentieth century by Isaiah Berlin. Pluralism elucidates these in interesting ways. First, value pluralism sheds light on three major aspects of the trial before the European Court of Human Rights: the nature (...) of the collision of values, the discrepancy between the two decisions, and the rationale of the final judgment. Secondly, this is my thesis that while the first judgment fits ethical monism, which underlies Dworkin’s ‘one right answer’ theory, the second ruling chimes with pluralism. The pluralist spirit of the Grand Chamber’s final decision turned Europe away from the path of Americanization. (shrink)

George Crowder’s article makes an interesting contribution to the literature on value pluralism. Yet, as a commentary onmy essay (Polanowska-Sygulska, 2019c) it is entirely misconceived. Crowder’s reading of my text is inadequate, in terms of both the legal and the philosophical aspects of my argument. Having ascribed to me the belief that pluralism always favors cultural diversity against legal uniformity (a belief which I do nothold), he argues that a single uniform law may engender more value diversity than a multiplicity (...) of local legal systems. This may indeed be so, but it is notmy concern. What Isaiah Berlin aimed at more than anything else was to bring about a decent society, which at times requires the pursuit of other values to be limited. I share his approach and therefore argue that, for the sake of decency, both value diversity and cultural diversity may sometimes need to be restricted. (shrink)

The topic of the article is the confrontation of the vision of surveillance capitalism, as outlined by Shoshana Zuboff in 2019, with Friedrich von Hayek’s neoliberal doctrine. The main research goal is to answer the questions whether Hayek has been rightly accused by Zuboff as being responsible for the rise of this threatening form of capitalism and for his alleged hostility to democracy. Similar objections against Hayek have also been raised by Andrzej Szahaj. The juxtaposition of the characteristics of surveillance (...) capitalism with the analysis of some selected threads, inherent in Hayek’s socio-economic conception, leads to the conclusion that Zuboff’s and Szahaj’s critical arguments do not seem thoroughly justified. (shrink)

On manipulating the meaning of words: the strategy of distorting the meaning of concepts in order to redirect people’s attitudes has been put in practice by ideologists and politicians for years. the paper focuses on the refections of selected thinkers and men of letters on this phenomenon. intellectual contributions of isaiah Berlin, Friedrich a. Hayek, leszek Kołakowski and charles l. stevenson on the one hand, and the considerations of george orwell, aldous Huxley, ayn Rand, sławomir mrożek and małgorzata musierowicz on (...) the other hand are analysed. some recent incarnations of the tactics of perverting the meaning of words in recent political discourse in poland are critically examined. special attention is given to the manipulating the meaning of “paedophilia” in the context of the nationwide discussion on child sexual abuse in the catholic church. it is concluded that the dishonourable practice of verbal misrepresentation used under communism is at work again, this time in even more sophisticated form. (shrink)