Chapter Pogląd Kazimierza Twardowskiego na temat zajmowania się przez filozofię „poglądami na świat i życie”. Kilka słów w kwestii rozumu praktycznego

The fate of “practical philosophy” in Poland was largely influenced by the views of Kazimierz Twardowski. This one, who had great merits for Polish philosophy, disciple of F. Brentano, was, on the one hand, a great admirer of Immanuel Kant and, on the other hand, completely disavowed his concept of...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Hlavní autor: Maciej Kaniowski, Andrzej
Médium: Online
Jazyk:polština
Vydáno: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego 2025
On-line přístup:ONIX_20250307_9788382200355_791
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
_version_ 1869521483284348928
author Maciej Kaniowski, Andrzej
author_browse Maciej Kaniowski, Andrzej
author_facet Maciej Kaniowski, Andrzej
author_sort Maciej Kaniowski, Andrzej
collection Directory of Open Access Books
description The fate of “practical philosophy” in Poland was largely influenced by the views of Kazimierz Twardowski. This one, who had great merits for Polish philosophy, disciple of F. Brentano, was, on the one hand, a great admirer of Immanuel Kant and, on the other hand, completely disavowed his concept of practical reason. The source of the admiration was that Kant deprived metaphysics (in its then and former understanding) of its right to have itself as a science, while he demanded that philosophical thinking should be moved to criticism. However, Twardowski seemed to completely overlook the fact that Kant’s criticism cannot be detached from – the other side of it – Kant’s transcendentalism. Admittedly, in a certain trend of the continuation of Kant’s transcendentalism in German philosophy, as well as by its Polish creative followers, there was a “dogmatic swing in the clouds”. However, this is not yet a sufficient reason to part with practical reason and agree with Twardowski, who claims that philosophy is not in charge of dealing with “views on the world and life”. Such views, among other things, on matters which have been dealt with by “practical reason” for centuries, have contributed to the creation of a gap in Polish philosophy of thinking about the possibility of dealing with matters connected with the view on the world and life within philosophy. Such thought, on the other hand, was carried out in German philosophy (as a result of Hegel’s transformation of “practical reason” into “objective spirit”, and the turn to “practice” – which means turning to work, social activity, or communication), as well as in American ragmatism (Charles Sanders Peirce). The theory of communicative rationality by Jürgen Habermas, which is also a response to the challenge of pluralism of world views, emerges from the combination of these two currents of philosophical reflection. Twardowski’s stance on the non-philosophical nature of dealing with “views on the world and life” contributed to the fact that Polish philosophical thought did not follow the path leading from Hegel, through Wilhelm von Humboldt, Charles Sanders Peirce, Hans-Georg Gadamer to Jürgen Habermas.
format Online
id doab-20.500.12854ir-155366
institution Directory of Open Access Books
language pol
publishDate 2025
publishDateRange 2025
publishDateSort 2025
publisher Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
publisherStr Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
record_format ojs
spelling doab-20.500.12854ir-1553662025-03-07T14:10:34Z Chapter Pogląd Kazimierza Twardowskiego na temat zajmowania się przez filozofię „poglądami na świat i życie”. Kilka słów w kwestii rozumu praktycznego Maciej Kaniowski, Andrzej The fate of “practical philosophy” in Poland was largely influenced by the views of Kazimierz Twardowski. This one, who had great merits for Polish philosophy, disciple of F. Brentano, was, on the one hand, a great admirer of Immanuel Kant and, on the other hand, completely disavowed his concept of practical reason. The source of the admiration was that Kant deprived metaphysics (in its then and former understanding) of its right to have itself as a science, while he demanded that philosophical thinking should be moved to criticism. However, Twardowski seemed to completely overlook the fact that Kant’s criticism cannot be detached from – the other side of it – Kant’s transcendentalism. Admittedly, in a certain trend of the continuation of Kant’s transcendentalism in German philosophy, as well as by its Polish creative followers, there was a “dogmatic swing in the clouds”. However, this is not yet a sufficient reason to part with practical reason and agree with Twardowski, who claims that philosophy is not in charge of dealing with “views on the world and life”. Such views, among other things, on matters which have been dealt with by “practical reason” for centuries, have contributed to the creation of a gap in Polish philosophy of thinking about the possibility of dealing with matters connected with the view on the world and life within philosophy. Such thought, on the other hand, was carried out in German philosophy (as a result of Hegel’s transformation of “practical reason” into “objective spirit”, and the turn to “practice” – which means turning to work, social activity, or communication), as well as in American ragmatism (Charles Sanders Peirce). The theory of communicative rationality by Jürgen Habermas, which is also a response to the challenge of pluralism of world views, emerges from the combination of these two currents of philosophical reflection. Twardowski’s stance on the non-philosophical nature of dealing with “views on the world and life” contributed to the fact that Polish philosophical thought did not follow the path leading from Hegel, through Wilhelm von Humboldt, Charles Sanders Peirce, Hans-Georg Gadamer to Jürgen Habermas. 2025-03-07T14:10:33Z 2025-03-07T14:10:33Z 2020 chapter ONIX_20250307_9788382200355_791 9788382200355 9788382200348 https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/155366 pol image/jpeg Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International https://www.press.uni.lodz.pl/index.php/wul/catalog/book/213 Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego 10.18778/8220-034-8.16 The fate of “practical philosophy” in Poland was largely influenced by the views of Kazimierz Twardowski. This one, who had great merits for Polish philosophy, disciple of F. Brentano, was, on the one hand, a great admirer of Immanuel Kant and, on the other hand, completely disavowed his concept of practical reason. The source of the admiration was that Kant deprived metaphysics (in its then and former understanding) of its right to have itself as a science, while he demanded that philosophical thinking should be moved to criticism. However, Twardowski seemed to completely overlook the fact that Kant’s criticism cannot be detached from – the other side of it – Kant’s transcendentalism. Admittedly, in a certain trend of the continuation of Kant’s transcendentalism in German philosophy, as well as by its Polish creative followers, there was a “dogmatic swing in the clouds”. However, this is not yet a sufficient reason to part with practical reason and agree with Twardowski, who claims that philosophy is not in charge of dealing with “views on the world and life”. Such views, among other things, on matters which have been dealt with by “practical reason” for centuries, have contributed to the creation of a gap in Polish philosophy of thinking about the possibility of dealing with matters connected with the view on the world and life within philosophy. Such thought, on the other hand, was carried out in German philosophy (as a result of Hegel’s transformation of “practical reason” into “objective spirit”, and the turn to “practice” – which means turning to work, social activity, or communication), as well as in American ragmatism (Charles Sanders Peirce). The theory of communicative rationality by Jürgen Habermas, which is also a response to the challenge of pluralism of world views, emerges from the combination of these two currents of philosophical reflection. Twardowski’s stance on the non-philosophical nature of dealing with “views on the world and life” contributed to the fact that Polish philosophical thought did not follow the path leading from Hegel, through Wilhelm von Humboldt, Charles Sanders Peirce, Hans-Georg Gadamer to Jürgen Habermas. 10.18778/8220-034-8.16 83bfe9c9-323d-4283-b087-d859fd9af314 9788382200355 9788382200348 239-251 open access
spellingShingle Maciej Kaniowski, Andrzej
Chapter Pogląd Kazimierza Twardowskiego na temat zajmowania się przez filozofię „poglądami na świat i życie”. Kilka słów w kwestii rozumu praktycznego
title Chapter Pogląd Kazimierza Twardowskiego na temat zajmowania się przez filozofię „poglądami na świat i życie”. Kilka słów w kwestii rozumu praktycznego
title_full Chapter Pogląd Kazimierza Twardowskiego na temat zajmowania się przez filozofię „poglądami na świat i życie”. Kilka słów w kwestii rozumu praktycznego
title_fullStr Chapter Pogląd Kazimierza Twardowskiego na temat zajmowania się przez filozofię „poglądami na świat i życie”. Kilka słów w kwestii rozumu praktycznego
title_full_unstemmed Chapter Pogląd Kazimierza Twardowskiego na temat zajmowania się przez filozofię „poglądami na świat i życie”. Kilka słów w kwestii rozumu praktycznego
title_short Chapter Pogląd Kazimierza Twardowskiego na temat zajmowania się przez filozofię „poglądami na świat i życie”. Kilka słów w kwestii rozumu praktycznego
title_sort chapter poglad kazimierza twardowskiego na temat zajmowania sie przez filozofie pogladami na swiat i zycie kilka slow w kwestii rozumu praktycznego
url ONIX_20250307_9788382200355_791
work_keys_str_mv AT maciejkaniowskiandrzej chapterpogladkazimierzatwardowskiegonatematzajmowaniasieprzezfilozofiepogladaminaswiatizyciekilkasłowwkwestiirozumupraktycznego