The article, being a part of the just prepared book, deals with two different interpretations of Nietzschean text. C. G. Jung devoted five years' Seminar to discuss "Thus spoke Zarathustra" in the Psychological Club (1934–39), M. Heidegger was giving lectures and developing his controversy (Auseinandersetzung) with Nietzsche between 1934–48, some pauses including. The thesis exposed in the article suggests that in Nietzsche's text they were looking for the kind of language, capable to generate transformation of individual and general culture of (...) being. The quest for such a regenerative code is explored in three main semantic fields: the "natural", the sacred and the artistic. The task of regaining "natural" character of human unity, despite of theoretical inadequacy of the category of "nature"; the aim of taking care of alive essence of sacrum as well as the possibilities of regeneration that may be found in the sphere of artistic experience, are considered in the light of Jungian and Heideggerian perspectives of reading Nietzsche. Ambivalence of their interpretations helps to show also certain continuous difficulties to get access to the sources of life. To endure these, at first unknown, conditions of our lives, allows the mind to learn and shape thinking from experience. Jung's and Heidegger's dialogues with Nietzsche may let us see that enduring in the unknown does not have to paralyze the growth of thinking. (shrink)

Searching for what is common to all Henryk Elzenberg’s works, the author of the paper wishes to reveal the uniqueness of his ways of thinking. For this purpose, the author points at a variety of intellectual ways Elzenberg explored, considers the links between thinking and action, and asks a question about the aim of thinking and its relation to what was thought earlier. The independence of Elzenberg’s thinking, his diligence and seriousness grounded on the importance of issues he touched on (...) render his philosophizing a case of ethical action. The firmness of the analyses that the Polish philosopher performed—particularly in the field of axiology—comes together with responsibility for the subject matter of his thinking. Strict mental discipline he managed to maintain in the face of values as well as his determination to hold onto them in his own life make Elzenberg a Master who is himself an instantiation—exemplum—of integrity in thinking. Maybe, we also could learn something from him, and, however difficult challenge it may seem, maybe it would be worthwhile to take it on and go our own way. (shrink)