Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Wyjaśnianie empiryczne a wyjaśnianie interpretacyjne działań politycznych

100%

Czajowski A.

|

2020

|

tom 4

43-60

EN

The article arranges issues related to explaining social phenomena, primarily political activities. Three types of explanation are mentioned in the literature: a reason explanation, an interpretative explanation (humanistic, understanding) and an integral explanation combining these two. The author discusses the types of explanation, where he replaces the term “causal explanation” with the term “empirical explanation”. Then he characterizes political activities and their results as an object of explanation. In the last part, on two examples, he examines the practice of empirical and interpretive explanation. With reference to the example of interpretive explanation, he recalls abductive reasoning, i.e. inference to the best explanation. In the interpretation process, in the absence of irrefutable evidence, none of the hypotheses can be confirmed. They can only be enhanced or made more attractive. Considering the imperfections of empirical and interpretive explanation, one should strive to use them complementarily.

PL

Artykuł porządkuje kwestie dotyczące wyjaśniania zjawisk społecznych, przede wszystkim działań politycznych. W literaturze wymienia się trzy rodzaje wyjaśnień: wyjaśnienie przyczynowe, wyjaśnienie interpretacyjne (humanistyczne, rozumiejące) oraz wyjaśnienie integralne, łączące te dwa. Autor omawia rodzaje wyjaśniania, przy czym termin „wyjaśnianie przyczynowe” zastępuje terminem „wyjaśnianie empiryczne”. Następnie charakteryzuje działania polityczne i ich rezultaty jako przedmiot wyjaśniania. W ostatniej części, na dwóch przykładach analizuje praktykę wyjaśniania empirycznego i interpretacyjnego. W odniesieniu do przykładu wyjaśniania interpretacyjnego przywołuje wnioskowanie abdukcyjne, czyli wnioskowanie do najlepszego wyjaśnienia. W procesie interpretacji, przy braku niezbitych dowodów, nie da się potwierdzić prawdziwości żadnej z hipotez. Można je tylko uprawdopodabniać lub uatrakcyjniać. Biorąc pod uwagę niedoskonałości wyjaśniania empirycznego i interpretacyjnego, należy dążyć do stosowania ich komplementarnie.

2

Polityka wobec zabijania ludzi w konfliktach społecznych. Wykład teoretyczno-metodologiczny

100%

Czajowski A.

|

tom 22

154-170

EN

There are two sides of life: its continuation to natural death and premature annihilation. These two processes occur in parallel, subjecting to nature and culture. This means that human life, regardless of natural conditions, depends in some respects on tradition and politica (politics and policy). People primarily protect life, but at the same time kill people and prevent killing in order to meet a number of needs. Often the cause of killing is the clash of those aims and then the killing is used to settle conflicts. Politica has a contradictory role in killing people: on the one hand counteracts this phenomenon, and on the other hand favors. Depending on the relationship between politica and killing, we differentiate killing politica, politica facilitating killing, anti-killing politica and non-killing politica.The nature and implications of politica involvement in killing of people in conflicts depend on the nature of the conflict. Another is the relation of politica to this phenomenon when the conflict is non-political and the other when it is political.Politica — from its advent to our modern times — is transformed into: apparently killing and encouraging killing, giving way to ever more visible counteracting killing and non-killing.

3

Polityka w pięciu odsłonach: metatypologia zjawiska

100%

Czajowski A.

|

tom 12

5-25

EN

The notions of “politics” and “political character” are more intuitive than scientific. They make difficult any distinguishing what is general, universal or political. They have a lot of logical mistakes in the definitions of political phenomena and also of typological shortages of such behaviors, like the political ones. The researchers try to classify a variety of concepts of politics. These categorizations capture the politics as it is commonly seen. For these reasons, they are insufficient. We need a comprehensive typology, capable of introducing the discipline, more precision as to the classification criteria, without demonstrating what the politics is. Taking into account my previous remarks, I propose the following approaches to this phenomenon: 1. common; 2. material and ideological-doctrinaire; 3. theoretical; 4. methodological; 5. sectional. Only within such general types, one might classify the politics according to its constituent characteristics and its different understandings.