"I reached the chair of philosophy via logic. Teaching logic became the field of my activity as a university professor of philosophy, a member of other humanistic faculties. Emphasis is here placed on the words 'teaching' and 'humanistic'. For my lectures and classes were conceived as an organon in the classical sense of the term, for philosophers as well as for those who, having completed their course of study, would espouse the cause of disseminating humanistic knowledge and thinking, particularly future (...) secondary school teachers. Somewhat later my activity embraced also law students. My linguistic equipment proved to, be very helpful in this respect. For it seems especially important when the problems of an organon of this kind are.. (shrink)

In this reminiscence I present some personal and little-known memories of my Father Tadeusz Kotarbiński. Among others, I dwell on his personality, the family atmosphere he created, his teaching talents, and his attitude towards the authorities of his times. I also speak about his artistic skills (notably his pencil drawings and poetry), his everyday language and the language of his lectures, as well as his hobbies like mushrooming, Polish bowling, and others.

ABOUT THE PUTTING NAMES TO OBJECTS, I.E. HOW TADEUSZ KOTARBIjSKI TEACHES UNDERSTAND STANISkAW LE3NIEWSKI’S ONTOLOGY S u m m a r y This article presents an attempt to fund Ontology of Stanis;aw Lemniewski on a simple theory with one primitive relation “being denoted by”. Developed theory shows that to the linguistic model of the Ontology can belong only such general names that in their extensions have at least two objects (references) denoted by individual names.

The structure of this paper is as follows. My starting point is psychological flexibility (henceforth, PF) as it has been presented in psychology. Here I offer a synthetic view which embraces the most crucial aspects of flexibility, and describes its functional roles and underlying mechanisms. Secondly, I move my attention onto the field of current action theory and discuss two elementary concepts we commonly use when describing our actions: intention and desire. Of course, there are many “theories of desire” and (...) there is no point in trying (nor even the option) to discuss all of them under one heading. To show where the question of PF sneaks into the scene of action theory, I explore the idea of the resistance of desire, as proposed by Timo Airaksinen. The second concept to investigate at this stage is intention. As in the previous case, it is plain that there are plenty of accounts of intentions and there are many roles they play in the phenomenology of action. For the purposes of this paper, we need only something that can be interpreted as an approach to PF. Such an approach can be found in the idea of stability of intention or a plan, discussed famously by Michael Bratman. According to my interpretation, these two ideas, resistance of desire and stability of intention, allow to initially understand some important aspects of PF in action theory. To get a slightly more comprehensive view – and to supplement the outcomes gained on the grounds of the analyses of these two accounts – I introduce, in the third step, the concept of plasticity which comes from the so-called praxiology proposed by Tadeusz Kotarbiński (Lvov-Warsaw School). I try to show how this concept is still feasible and how it may enrich current philosophical accounts of agential flexibility. The strategy behind this stage of the paper is to enrich the Bratmanian approach to psychological stability. The last part of the paper contains some remarks on the philosophical outcome of the interdisciplinary approach to PF. (shrink)

The paper is an introductory essay to the Polish translation of M.E. Bratman's paper The Fecundity of Planning Agency. Instead of summarizing the main drifts of Bratman's work, the author tries to show a few important parallels between his approach to action theory and the so-called praxiology proposed by Tadeusz Kotarbinski. It occurs that there are important similarities between their approaches both to specific problems in action theory and to the general question how to understood agency. A brief (...) presentation of these similarities gives two central results. Firstly, it allows to interpret Bratman as a kind of praxiologist, and, secondly, it shows that praxiological thinking proposed by Kotarbinski is still a vital perspective in contemporary action theory. (shrink)

When discussing Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz's role in philosophy, it is worthwhile recalling his participation in scholarly controversies. It was characteristic of his open mind that his taking part in debates was motivated by a vivid interest in various ways of thinking. Ajdukiewicz's intellectual power consisted, so to speak, in his ability of not to understand. This ability has brought him success in some important debates, concerning i.a. the classical logical concept of contradiction and the debate on universals raised in modern Poland (...) with the nominalistic program of Stanislaw Lesniewski and Tadeusz Kotarbiński. In this latter debate Ajdukiewicz shows that when one says that individuals exist, the word „exist" refers to something different that in the statement that universals exist. In other words, the functor „is" has a different category in the definition of an individual from that appearing in the definition of a universal; hence there must be two different senses of the word „exist". (shrink)

Prakseologia jako praktyka czynu zainicjowana przez francuskiego intelektualistę Alfreda Espinasa i Aleksandra Bogdanowa to nauka o wszelkich sprawnościach ludzkiej działalności. Jak piszą Tadeusz Kotarbiński oraz Tadeusz Pszczołowski: będąc metodologią ogólną, której działania koncentrują się wokół wyodrębniania i systematyzacji bogactwa różnorodnych form działania, prakseologia staje się także próbą ich usprawnienia i upraktycznienia. To upraktycznienie zakłada analizę rzeczywistości oraz przyjęcie pewnych sposobów obchodzenia się z zasobami możliwości. Zatem prakseologia już jako tektologia każe nazywać wszelkie możliwe działanie organizowaniem lub łączeniem w (...) całość bogatego i skomplikowanego spiętrzenia zasobów. Jednym z efektów tego spiętrzenia powinna być gwarancja dopasowania środków do założonego celu, a zarazem towarzysząca temu okazja uzyskania optimum rezultatu. Artykuł pokazuje, że elementy prakseologiczne uobecniają się współcześnie w procesie coachingowym. Dzięki temu coaching jako aktywna forma komunikacji dialogicznej jest obecnie jedną z najskuteczniejszych form wspierania drugiego człowieka w samodzielnym odkrywaniu własnych zdolności oraz potencjału zasobów pozwalających sprawnie realizować wyznaczane cele. (shrink)

The book introduces Tadeusz Kotarbiński’s philosophy of action into the mainstream of contemporary action-theoretical debates. Piotr Makowski shows that Kotarbiński–Alfred Tarski’s teacher and one of the most important philosophers of the renowned Lvov-Warsaw school—proposed a groundbreaking, original, and (in at least a few respects) still fresh perspective in action theorizing. The book examines and develops Kotarbiński’s ideas in the context of the most recent discussions in the philosophy of action. The main idea behind Kotarbiński’s action theory—and thus, behind this (...) book—is the significance of the philosophical investigations of the general conditions of effectiveness, efficiency, and economy of intentional actions. Makowski presents and reinterprets Kotarbiński’s views on these dimensions of our activities and sheds new light on the most important areas of action theory. (shrink)

The first part of the article contains a logical reconstruction and a methodological analysis of some aspects of the famous Władysław Witiwcki’s work “Faith of Enlightened”. In particular, the classifications of believers and the principles of these classifications are analyzed; methodological errors committed by Witwicki are indicated. In the second part of the text, Witwicki's distinctions are illustrated by attitudes towards God and faith represented by four representatives of the Lvov-Warsaw School: Kazimierz Twardowski, Jan Łukasiewicz, Tadeusz Kotarbiński, and Józef (...) Maria Bocheński. (shrink)

1. Directives méthodologiques de Descartes. — 2. Définition de la méthodologie générale. Trois sections de la praxéologie : détermination des notions, typologie et critique des notions, partie normative. — 3. Détermination des notions praxéologiques. — 4. Typologie et critique des actions : a) Description et enregistrement des diverses formes de l’action ; b) exemples de progrés pratique ; c) exemples de pathologie de l’action. — 5. Normes de la méthodologie générale. — 6. Élements praxéologiques des autres sciences. — 7. Ce (...) qu’on peut encore faire dans ce domaine. — 8. Rapport de la praxéologie à l’éthique. (shrink)