Polite talk – The paper aims to analyze the role that books of manners from different historical times assign to language in defining politeness. It also tries to find differences and similarities among them and to explain principles that books of manners share with theoretical models on politeness, notwithstanding the descriptive perspective of the first and the normative point of view of the latter.
The aim of this paper is to consider the not so well investigated problem of the role that language has played in Karl Marx’s thinking. The first section discusses several examples of Marxist attempts at philosophical or linguistic reflection on language. I propose the thesis that Marxist meaning theory did not seriously evolve due to the domination of the ‛Traditional Meaning Theory’ (TMT) – irrespective of the actual social conditions. In the second section I undertake some adumbrations on the tendencies of contemporary philosophy of language, such as externalism or pragmatism, whose premonitions can be found in Marx. I also point out that combined with historical materialism they can no longer fit TMT. Finally, I argue that the notion of language and the division of linguistic labor may solve some issues of Marx’s conception of ideology.
The contemporary warfare seems to have great influence on the way social sciences position themselves within the socio-political contexts of today. This is being implemented in many cases by the geopolitical context of 9/11 and the fall of former centers of power (end of the Cold War). Cultural anthropology, which shared a similar dilemma in the formative period of its own history provides us today with one of the most controversial examples in this matter. The program initiated by US Army back in 2006 called Human Terrain System started a wide spread debate on ethical issues regarding doing ethnographic fieldwork in a militarized landscape. HTS became thus a field of intellectual and political polemics between certain groups of researches. The academic and political debate on HTS seems to be put in a post-colonial context as a new form of mixing of science and ideology. This paper tackles the problem of emergence of a new type of anthropological understanding of the cultural other and as well its own methods and ethical standards in a situation, where crisis seems to be a permanent state of the discipline and the world its trying to describe.