Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

“Epistemological Reading”: Stanley Cavell’s Method of Reading Literature

100%

Filipczuk M.

Estetyka i Krytyka

|

2016

|

nr 4(43)

65-84

EN

Not many readers will recognize Disowning Knowledge: Seven Plays of Shakespeare by Stanley Cavell as either a piece of philosophical writing or literary criticism, so it may be useful to ask what method Cavell uses to read literature, what are the main features of his approach, and whether he has a coherent view on what reading literature means. I examine Cavell’s interdisciplinary eclecticism, the feature which makes his work so original, and I describe his moving away from the British and American analytic tradition in which he was trained to other sources of inspiration, especially Thoreau. I also stress the important fact that Cavell does not avoid autobiographical motifs in his writings, the style of which derives to some extent from the Jewish tradition of storytelling. In his writings Cavell declares his adherence to an ahistorical approach, maintaining that in a sense philosophy is trans‑historical. In many of his books the central issue is the challenge that skepticism poses, and he endeavors to make a convincing case against it. Although Cavell’s work covers a broad range of interests, including tragedy and literature, as well as Romantic poetry, Shakespeare, Henry James and Samuel Beckett, I try to answer the question of why his analyses of skepticism in literature focus especially on the works of Shakespeare.

2

Matafora jako marzenie języka. Koncepcja metafory Donalda Davidsona

100%

Filipczuk M.

IDEA. Studia nad strukturą i rozwojem pojęć filozoficznych

|

2016

|

tom 28/1

217-243

EN

In his article What metaphors means Donald Davidson points out that there is an "error and confusion" in claiming "that a metaphor has, in addition to its literal sense or meaning, another sense or meaning". Metaphor has no special meaning, says Davidson and gives a number of arguments to support his controversial thesis. "If a metaphor has a special cognitive content, why should it be so difficult or impossible to set it out?" – he asks rhetorically. Davidson makes many remarks about the effects of a metaphor; he shows that metaphor belongs exclusively to the domain of use and denies that the metaphorical sentences have any special cognitive content. "For a metaphor says only what shows on its face – usually a patent falsehood or an absurd truth... given in the literal meaning of the words". In the first part of my paper, I analyse Davidson’s concept of metaphor in terms of his own assumptions. First, I argue that Davidson narrows the commonsense use of “meaning”, which is much wider than he makes it out to be. Secondly, if metaphors belong exclusively to the domain of use, it is only when language is used in a peculiar, untypical way (drawing our attention to the paradoxical coincidence of words within metaphor) that a sentence can be considered metaphorical. If so, all we do is violate the everyday use of language, or even modify its rules, and let the context influence the meaning of words within the metaphor. We don't make those words mean something other than they usually mean. The last part of my paper deals with Davidson's claim that interpretation is the work of imagination and creation. I argue that the understanding of metaphor has a dynamic structure. If metaphorical sentences say something with suggestive indefiniteness, it is because metaphor is a kind of task that lies before a reader or a listener, a variant of ancient gnome. It is true that it is all about the effect but usually the effect is not instantaneous. Following Coleridge, I view understanding in terms of growth. It leads an individual to undertake an attempt to grasp certain objective truths. What we notice thanks to extraordinary metaphors in literature and philosophy is that they illuminate us somehow. Our task is then to express this effect in language. Therefore, contrary to what Davidson claims, the possibility of multiple interpretations do not necessarily question the objective cognitive content of a metaphor.

3

„Jak wyprowadzić z ruin ludzi” – o sensie poezji po „Drugiej Apokalipsie”. O kilku utworach Zbigniewa Herberta

63%

Filipczuk M. , Filipczuk M.

Prace Literaturoznawcze

|

2017

|

nr 5

107-122

EN

After the Second World War, discussions erupted concerning the character and legitimacy of art, including poetry. The famous line by Theodore Adorno, saying that writing poetry after Auschwitz is impossible, was frequently debated. However, should the silence of poetry be the answer to genocide? Polish poets also joined this international discussion. The painful paradox was most prominently displayed by the attitude of Tadeusz Różewicz, who simultaneously wrote and emphasized the moral ambiguity of “writing poems after Oświęcim”. He posited that the cultural inheritance did not prevent the moral and material ruin, and if so, then the death of fundamental values should be accompanied by the complete collapse of the higher human activities that are based on these values. Every poem that emerges after this upheaval of the world thus far participates in the creation of falsehood; it is another element upholding the appearances that everything is the same as it once was. This poet of the second half of the twentieth century stood in a morally ambiguous position, allowing himself a voice when so many people had been deprived of their own voice. Tadeusz Różewicz, noting the “death of poetry”, did not put down his pen. Zbigniew Herbert takes a completely different stance on this issue. The purpose of this study is the analysis of works that provide insight into Zbigniew Herbert’s thoughts on the subject of the role of art. This examination focuses on Herbert’s work from the 1950s (his first two collections: Chord of Light and Hermes, Dog and Star).

4

„PODRÓŻNIK WĘDRUJĄCY DO ŹRÓDEŁ”. WYBRANE WĄTKI W TWÓRCZOŚCI ZBIGNIEWA HERBERTA W KONTEKŚCIE MYŚLI PRESOKRATYKÓW

63%

Filipczuk M. , Filipczuk M.

Świat Tekstów. Rocznik Słupski

|

2017

|

nr 15

123-142

PL

Life is a journey as long as a man is set to absorb the world, to accept it in its diversi-ty and richness. Zbigniew Herbert often expresses the conviction regarding the “inex-haustible splendour of the world”, and admits that he is “seduced by the beautiful and diversified world” (A Prayer of Mr. Cogito – the Traveller). Both the real and the meta-phorical travelling understood as getting to know – exploring – learning anew, are the domain of the Ionian philosophers. No wonder that the philosophy of Ionian thinkers serves Herbert as the incessant source in his intellectual peregrinations. In this article we explore some interconnections between the aforementioned tradition and Herbert’s work.