The main purpose of the article is to define the framework in which one can situate Leopold Blaustein’s philosophy. The author focuses on the question of the method which is used by Blaustein and he situates it in the historical-philosophical context. The article defends the thesis that Blaustein uses a method which can be labelled as a phenomenologically oriented descriptive psychology that is close to, though not identical with, Edmund Husserl’s project as formulated in the first edition of his Logical (...) Investigations and that is connected to Husserl’s 1925 lectures on the phenomenological psychology. The article is divided into four parts. In the first part, the author disputes the one-sided classifications of Blaustein’s philosophy either as a continuator of the analytical tradition of the Lvov-Warsaw School, or as a mere repetition of Husserl’s achievements. In the next part, the author sketches an intellectual biography of Blaustein and on this basis he defines the context in which one has to situate this thought. In this regard, two further parts of the article are devoted to two sources of inspiration for Blaustein. In the third part, a selection of methods and concepts of descriptive psychology are examined, and in the last part of the article, references to Husserl’s phenomenology are explored. (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.

I risultati dell’attività e degli esperimenti effettuati dal filosofo lucano Francesco De Sarlo presso l’Istituto di Studi Superiori e di Perfezionamento di Firenze sono riportati nei due volumi delle «Ricerche di Psicologia», del 1905 e del 1907. Questo.

Latin textbooks in metaphysical psychology as in other branches of Scholastic philosophy have a strong family likeness. The same problems are dealt with in the same way; the differences are not striking. But some are better than others, and that of P. Siwek deserves to rank very high indeed. His treatment of most problems is conservative; the same theses and objections occur; but is much fuller than other works of the same class. For the author is not merely an expert (...) on the psychology of Aristotle and Spinoza but has written important works on positive psychology and anthropology. This book has benefited from these researches. There are many new arguments for familiar theses and a large number of scholia deal with topics of general interest seldom raised in metaphysical psychology. His bibliographies are very extensive. For these reasons this fifth edition of P. Siwek’s work is very welcome. (shrink)