Dylemat Jörgensena długo stanowił dla logiki zagadkę. Do jego rozwiązania okazało się konieczne dokonanie pewnych rozstrzygnięć filozoficznych. Artykuł podaje te rozstrzygnięcia i omawia sposób rozwiązania dylematu.

Przedmiotem artykułu jest paradoks fikcji. Prezentuję wybrane najważniejsze próby jego wyjaśnienia i rozwiązania. Twierdzę, że ów paradoks wynika z przyjęcia silnego założenia, że do powstania reakcji emocjonalnej niezbędne jest przekonanie o realnym istnieniu czegoś. Przekonanie to wcale nie jest jednak konieczne — można bać się, że p, a równocześnie nie mieć silnego przekonania, że p. Wystarczy posiadać określoną myśl. Bronię tezy, że nasze reakcje emocjonalne zapośredniczone są przez umysł i jego reprezentacyjno-treściowe wyposażenie. Ze względu na skromne piśmiennictwo poświęcone (...) temu tematowi w języku polskim artykuł został napisany w języku rodzimym autora. Artykuł ma zatem charakter edukacyjny i przede wszystkim popularyzacyjny. (shrink)

In this article, I make an attempt to define terms such as: tragedy, absurdity, and paradox as conceived of by the German essayist Walter Hilsbecher. This is a task which is both difficult and interesting, mainly because of the fact that concepts from within speculative philosophy are relatively rarely subject to scrupulous definitions. The reason for this state of affairs lies in the difficulty to capture the meaning of these concepts within a rigid framework. These problems also appear in Hilsbecher’s (...) 1972 work titled Tragizm, absurd, paradoks [Tragedy, Absurd, Paradox]. The philosophy of the absurd – the methodological separation of which I propose – has the absurd for its central concept, but it is a concept which eludes sharp definitions, too. This article aims to reconstruct Hilsbecher’s vocabulary of concepts crucial to the philosophy of absurdity in reference to the tradition of contemporary speculative philosophy. By locating the German writer’s thought in the context of other authors working in a similar thematic and stylistic context, I will outline this specific strand of philosophy. (shrink)

The main aim of this article is to pose and consider the following question: Does the reasoning that led to Kripkenstein’s sceptical paradox undermine all versions of materialism, including nonreductive materialism? First, I present other versions of materialism in the philosophy of mind. Then I point out that, according to nonreductive materialists, one can neither define mental properties in terms of physical properties nor derive psycho‑physical laws from the laws of physics. The presently‑understood thesis of materialism is confined by the (...) following claim: the same distribution of physical properties entails the same distribution of mental properties. In other words, the mental properties supervene upon physical properties. This account then leads to the following formulation of the main question: Assuming that Kripkenstein is right, do mental properties supervene upon physical properties? Taking into account that answering this question requires a discussion of the notions of supervenience and Kripkenstein’s paradox, I devote two parts of my paper to these topics. The conclusion which I reach is as follows: If the reasoning that led to Kripkenstein’s paradox is correct, mental properties can only globally supervene upon physical properties, and consequently no version of materialism can be empirically justified. (shrink)

The Knower Paradox is an element of the class of paradoxes of self-reference. It demonstrates that any theory Ó which (1) extends Robinson arithmetic Q, (2) includes a unary knowledge predicate K, and (3) contains certain elementary epistemic principles involving K is inconsistent. In this paper I present different versions of the Knower Paradox (both in the framework of the first-order arithmetic and in the modal logic). There are several solutions of the paradox. Some of them I discuss in detail, (...) namely solution developed within modal logic, solution proposed by C. A. Anderson and solution proposed by P. Égré. The common defect of these proposals is that they developed a connection between the concepts of knowledge and provability. Finally, I suggest a solution using the basic ideas of the revision theory of definitions. (shrink)

Artiklen vil diskutere det pædagogiske paradoks primært ud fra D. Benner. Artiklen hævder, at det pædagogiske paradoks hviler på en forståelse af frihed, der hos Benner er underbelyst, og en idé om autenticitet, der ender i det isolerede Selv. Jeg foreslår her over for at studere appellens fænomen m.h.p. at indkredse en idé om frihed, der ikke udelukker enhver ydre indflydelse.

I argue in the paper that the conception of family resemblance discussed by Ludwig Wittgenstein in Philosophical Investigations is a result of the application of Wittgenstein’s general argument against rule‑following to the pragmatics of all concepts. My argument runs as follows: First, (1) I criticize interpretations of family resemblance as a ‘local’ theory, applicable only to some concepts. Next, (2) I present and criticise a classic argument against the conception of family resemblance. In the following section, (3) I analyse attempts (...) to explicate family resemblance in terms of their possessing a common basic feature. I end my paper (4) by summarizing conclusions drawn from this critical review of literature and I briefly point to a possible solution of the difficulties generated by the concept of family resemblance. (shrink)

Zbigniew Tworak The early Leśniewski and the Liar AntinomyIn his early, prelogistic article „Critique of the Logical Principle of Excluded Middle” (1913) Stanislaw Leśniewski presents a certain solution to the Liar Antinomy. He argues that the Logical Principle of Excluded Middle is false but he defends the so-called Principle of Contradictory Sentences (the weaker version of the Logical Principle of Excluded Middle) and the Logical Principle of Contradiction. The paper discusses this solution. Leśniewski’s solution to the Liar antinomy differs from (...) Tarski’s in several important details. On the one hand, there is a connection between the proposition and a medieval solution to insolubilia, the so-called restrictio theory. A restrictio is a doctrine which has it that self-reference is illegitimate (either in all cases or in some cases only). On the other hand, there is a connection between the proposition and the contextual approach (what is communicated by the sentence varies with the context of use of the sentence). Keywords: Stanislaw Leśniewski, Liar Antinomy, restrictio theory. (shrink)

"Realitas formalis/realitas obiectiva. The Paradox of Descartes’ Representationism" The paper discusses some aspects of the highly original theory of representation, developed by Descartes in his ‘Meditations’, and based on the ontological isomorphism of ideas and their material correlates. In the course of the analysis it is shown that the Cartesian theory involves unavoidable problems with discrimination or correlation of the objects in question, which is connected with the problem of constitutiveness of their modes of existence. Consequently, the conclusion of the (...) paper is that representationism based on the isomorphistic theory of representation turns out to be self-contradictory. (shrink)

This article is an attempt of representing St. Augustine's struggle against the greatest problems of Christian ethics, namely, the problem of evil. After the introduction of the philosophical grounds of the problem, we will turn to the outline of the way the Bishop of Hippo has gone through in the quest of the rational explanations for the existence of evil. An analysis of Augustine's works has shown that he lost his hope to find any sensible answer to this question with (...) the lapse of time, and abandoned himself to an almost blind faith. The Saint leaves us all by ourselves with this anxious question about evil. (shrink)

Glavna je svrha ovoga članka analizati Argument kontinuiteta, jedan od najutjecajnijih argumenata na kojemu su utemeljeni moralna osuda znanstvenih i medicinskih praksi poput istraživanja i eksperimenata s embrijem, potpomognuta reprodukcije, pobačaja, terapeutskog kloniranja, itd. Prvo se daje vrlo kratko objašnjenje pristupa koji pripisuje status markirajućeg događaja fertilizaciji, identificirajući Argument kontinuiteta među drugim argumentacijama. Nadalje, pokušava se razdvojiti tri moguće interpretacije pojma kontinuiteta pretpostavljenog u Argumentu kontinuiteta, te izdvojiti najuvjerljiviju filozofsku i znanstvenu interpretaciju postfertilizacijskog kontinuiteta. Naposljetku, tvrdim da iz filozofski i (...) znanstveno najprihvatljivije interpretacije ne slijedi: 1) da je fertilizacija nužna odrednica moralnog statusa; 2) da je fertilizacija najrazboritija odrednica moralnog statusa. Ukratko, ovaj članak ima dva cilja: I) pokazati da upravo taj argument ne povlači za sobom stajalište da su gore spomenute prakse moralno nedopustive; II) sugerirati da bi neke pragmatičke strategije koje se bave soritom-prouzročenim paradoksima mogle osigurati filozofijski i znanstveno primjeren okvir za alternativni pristup. (shrink)

The author presents a uniform formulation of the Paradox of an Unexpected Ex-amination and classifies proposed solutions of the antinomy. The analysis of the so-lutions and counterarguments found in the literature of the problem allows to point possible further developments and criticism.