In this article, I compare two positions – emergentism and panpsychism, in relation to the problem of the nature of consciousness. I analyze arguments offered in support of both positions and undertake to question them. I focus on panpsychism as the less known and more controversial position. Panpsychism and emergentism are considered “metaphysical hypotheses”. Finally I propose emergentism as a preferable position in view of the fact that it is impossible to defend panpsychism as a coherent position, compatible with science.
According to Nicolai Hartmann, the correlativistic prejudice is the claim that a being must be a correlate of a subject, and this, he argues, is the main prejudice of Husserl’s phenomenology taken as an eidetic science of transcendental consciousness with its correlates. In contrast to Hartmann, the author of this article claims that Husserl’s conception of the noetic-noematic correlation does not lead to the correlativistic prejudice. Husserl distinguishes between two concepts of object: the noematic ‛object simpliciter’ (the pure X) and the ‛object in the How of its determinations’ (a noematic sense), and he demonstrates that the noematic ‛object simpliciter’ transcends the limit of actual noetic-noematic correlation, it is a correlate of the Idea in the Kantian sense of the term and this idea cannot be intrinsically given in its content. In the article the author shows that Husserl’s concept of the noematic ‘object simpliciter’ as a pure X is similar to Kant’s concept of transcendental object as ‛something in general = X’. In analogy to a transcendental object, noematic ‛object simpliciter’ is partially knowable and it appears to be an irrational fact in its unknowable rest. As a consequence, the ‛object simpliciter’ is something more than a correlate of consciousness and retains always its extra-noematic content. Therefore, the world is only partially correlative to the possibility of experience.
Henri Bergson as well as Gaston Milhaud undertake a radical critique of the conception of radical determinism because they both think that mind is able to act in a free and creative manner. In the article, I examine to what degree their arguments, aimed to prove this autonomy, converge. I inquire whether their endorsement of freedom of the mental acts led the two philosophers to the same conclusions regarding the cognitive extent of the intellect and therefore the parallel description of the status of scientific cognition.
Public education is educating influence of wide range media on political beliefs, worldviews and patterns of the everyday life of the audience, and of the potential electorate. The public intellectuals (the Henry A. Giroux concept), significant and respected experts (academics, journalists, politicians) play a special role. The article contains the presentation and analysis of the reaction of American public intellectuals to the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States – from the perspective of critical-emancipatory pedagogy. These are extremely critical to the consequences of D. Trump's choice: Ken Wilber's, Henry A. Giroux’s, Noam Chomsky’s, and several authors in the Berkeley Review of Education 2017/1 publications and speeches are recalled. The author concludes that Poland no longer has to imitate America, because in authoritarian drift (turn) it is ahead of it.
The presented article points to the issues of self-consciousness and the possibilities of its development. It defines in this context also concepts of self-evaluation, self-respect, self-appreciation, self-recognition, self-confidence and self-realization. In the text, it is emphasized that self-consciousness is related to the awareness of one´s own psychophysical and social identity - I myself and the world and my place in it. An important means for the development of the healthy self-consciousness is also praise. In the conclusion of the article, attention is paid to the psycho-hygiene as prevention of the failure.
The article analizes Stanisław Pigoń’s essay ‘Some Golden Thoughts on the Chair of Polish Literature’ written to commemorate the 600th jubilee of the Jagiellonian University. Stanisław Pigoń (1885-1968), Distinguished Profesor of Polish Literature, had it published in the Cracow weekly Życie Literackie in May 1964; its expanded version was published two years later in a volume of essays Drzewiej i wczoraj [In the Old Days and Yesterday] in 1966. Both versions were published again in a a bibliophile volume in December 2018 (the manuscript and the printed versions). At the heart of Pigoń’s essay are the twin ideas of freedom and the ‘spiritual life of the nation’, borrowed from Juliusz Słowacki’s epic poem The Spirit King. The article examines Pigoń’s key theme and the manner in which, as he saw it, it shaped the lectures of the most eminent professors of Polish literature in the 19th and 20th century (Michał Wiszniewski, Karol Mecherzyński, Stanisław Tarnowski, Ignacy Chrzanowski). Pigoń’s survey ends in 1910, but, as the author of the article observes, by that time the ideas he so strongly believed in were as relevant as ever.