Wincenty Lutoslawski in Vilnius (1919 - 1931). Attempts at Fetching M. Borowski, Appointing T. Czezowski and Doctorate of B. Woyczynski
Work in the Stefan Batory University and stay in Vilnius were for W. Lutoslawski the only period in life that could spend on systematic scientific and didactic work in Polish academy. However, individuality and behaviour of the philosopher embroiled him with the members of the Board of Faculty of Arts in the University. The most serious conflict took place when Lutoslawski made many attempts at fetching Marian Borowski to Vilnius. Although the doubts of the Board concerning candidate's moral principles were finally dispelled, and the clash between Lutoslawski and Faculty was solved to the philosopher's advantage by a particular committee, the cause told upon his later work in Vilnius.In the article was also presented the inner history of appointing Tadeusz Czezowski to a professorship. What interesting, Czezowski together with Lutoslawski had in the beginning the greatest influence on philosophy that was cultivated in the period of twenty years after World War I. Lutoslawski's opinion on his own work in Vilnius was negative, but, in fact, it does not seem to be right. Undoubtedly, the view can be impaired by the personage of Benedykt Woyczynski, who wrote doctor's thesis under direction of Lutoslawski and took a doctor's degree on Plato's philosophy. Lutoslawski and the others set all their hopes on Woyczynski, who was able to set up in Vilnius a historical and philosophical research centre. Unfortunately, Woyczynski's sudden death of tuberculosis made it impossible. Lutoslawski's pension also brought about many difficulties that were connected with one missing year of work, and such circumstances made it impossible to get retiring full pays. The problem was finally solved to the philosopher's and his family advantage thanks to the friendly attitude of principals of the Stefan Batory University. A flighty personality of Lutoslawski made it impossible for him to work in the scientific and didactic field systematically in Vilnius. These years were full of disappointments that were firmly connected with work in new and not too large national scientific centre. A range of the problems was extensive and icluded: prosaic difficulties (troubles with academic service, flats and a long way from country's centre); organizational problems (a lack of abundant library enabling effective scientific work); and mutual relations between people (clashes with students and frictions occuring within the faculties). However, one should fairly admit that Lutoslawski's expectations in this field strayed from the reality. Moreover, in his estimation concerning the Vilnius period, Lutoslawski left out of account the personage of B. Woyczynski. Undoubtedly, it was unjust to the whole Vilnius circle.
CEJSH db identifier