Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Wstęp do estetyki Derridy i Lyotarda

100%

Słomski W.

|

nr 4(25)

143-145

EN

There have been outlined serious discrepancies between philosophies of Derrida and Lyotard on the grounds of deliberations concerning art. Lyotard questions the notion of beauty, demanding a replacement of it with a notion of the sublime, thanks to which artistic creation could also get rid of its constraints. Lyotard argues that beauty is possible thanks to the mimesis of nature, but the mimesis requires observance of the rules. Rejecting the idea of beauty, as a supreme value in art, we reject the necessity of subordinating art to rules, or, in Lyotard’s words, we sacrifice it for the freedom of practical reason.

2

Finding a Systematic Base for Derrida’s Work

100%

Galetti D.

|

tom 15

|

nr 2

275-300

EN

Derrida became increasingly overt in later years in suggesting that his work displays a rigour, and even a “logic.” Further, it is becoming accepted that deconstruction arose in dialogue with Husserl. In support of these views, this article points out that in 1990 Derrida told us that his first work of 1954 revealsa “law” which guides his career, and that some responses had already arisen there. The work of 1954 is examined, and an interrelated “system” developed by which the responses relate to the law, to help find a common, early and systematic base to apply to Derrida’s oeuvre as it develops. Brief examples will be pointed to in closing to show that this basis subsists, at least in part, in later work.

3

Wstęp do filozofii Jean-François Lyotarda

100%

Słomski W. , Czarnecki P.

|

nr 4(25)

119-142

EN

There is no doubt that Lyotard’s the most famous achievement is his conception of metanarrative. This concept undermines the credibility of traditional philosophy along with its claim for conceptual clarity, thanks to which we would be able to speak about the world as it “really” appears. Lyotard has pointed out that since the Enlightenment we have lived in an illusion believing in future possibility of coming to fruition of the narrative of the dialectics of Spirit, the emancipation of reason, social progress, etc. While rejecting metanarratives and proposing a limitation to micro-narration instead, Lyotard has established the theoretical foundations of a pluralistic society, seeking solutions of its own problems not by consensus, but by permanent endless disputes. He has presented, in essence, a new image of society as a multiplicity of various subsystems and discourses, none of which can claim to be superior to others. Despite sometimes harsh criticism, there will be only a slight exaggeration in the statement that his concepts have influenced not only the philosophy of the last decades of the 20th century, but indirectly also social reality, since the concept of the pluralistic society is derived directly from the philosophy of modernism. Even if we find that complaints made against Lyotard to be legitimate, we cannot deny that society functioning as Lyotard has desired, would be the society free from the threat of the rebirth of totalitarianism.

4

O dekonstrukcji

100%

Słomski W.

|

nr 4(25)

261-268

EN

From general assumptions concerning the method of reading the text, a series of detailed implications, important both for philosophy and for social, and political reality are drawn by Derrida. One of the binary oppositions, which Derrida submits to deconstruction, is the opposition between literalism and a metaphor. Also, that opposition, according to the French thinker, after a closer examination turns out to be a myth. According to popular belief, the literal meaning of the expression takes precedence over all metaphorical use in the sense that it is the foundation upon which the metaphorical use is built. From this point of view, a metaphor is supposed to be at most an addition and an ornament, and if it is supposed to be used in philosophy, it is only in exceptional circumstances, and to facilitate the understanding of the content that the philosopher tries to explain in any way possible in a language devoid of metaphors. In accordance with the assumptions of deconstruction, Derrida reverses this order and the concept, traditionally considered subservient to its opposition, puts in the first place. First of all, he notices that a metaphor does not belong to the language of philosophy, but to the colloquial language. We could expect that in order to understand the meaning of a metaphor in a philosophical text, we should translate it into a natural language in which we will be able to discover its literal meaning. Derrida believes that the process of reaching that literality we can admittedly begin, i.e., for any philosophical metaphor we can indicate some other term that comes off as literal, however, the term, after a closer analysis, also turns out to be a metaphor for which we need to find another expression that comes off as literal, etc. The difference between a philosophical metaphor and a natural expression comes down to the superficial impression of literalness, while, as a matter of fact, the natural expressions turn out to be old, “worn-out”, as Derrida expresses, metaphors.

5

Systemy filozoficzne Derridy i Lyotarda

100%

Słomski W.

|

nr 4(25)

157-173

EN

Jacques Derrida and Jean-François Lyotard are the creators of a philosophical and cultural movement called postmodernism (Lyotard has also contributed to the popularization of the term “postmodernism”), but it should be remembered that currently the term “postmodernism” refers to the entire spectrum of various ideas, the ideas and texts from various fields, therefore, it is impossible to identify the philosophy of Derrida or the philosophy of Lyotard with the movement in philosophy or, more importantly, the humanities and social sciences, which we now call postmodernism. From today’s perspective, both Derrida and Lyotard belong to a large group of authors whose work constitutes broadly understood postmodernism, but it would be unwarranted to claim that this movement stems directly from their achievements. These philosophers have begun a new way of practicing philosophy and proposed a new point of view, but they did not create concepts that would be widely accepted by philosophers who describe themselves as postmodernists. They also did not raise any disciples or successors who would attempt to develop the concepts outlined by them, although undoubtedly some of their concepts have had a significant impact on both the development of philosophy and the humanities, and social sciences. The concept of Derrida’s deconstruction proved to be the most influential (by that, however, it is necessary to understand the general method of reading texts, but not the collection of Derrida’s views, sometimes referred to as “deconstruction”), and Lyotard’s thesis concerning the end of Grand Narratives. The detailed theses on aesthetic, social, semantic and, finally, political issues are, as it seems, known primarily to philosophy experts.

6

Nécessité d’une conversion philosophique et trois points de blocages à dépasser dans la conviction pastorale d’apostolat d’aujourd’hui du point de vue de la théologie

38%

Kasprzak A. A.

|

nr 2

95-110

FR

Pour proclamer la foi une simple conviction religieuse n’est pas suffisante. La pastorale d’aujourd’hui doit prendre en compte l’enjeu fondamental du changement de paradigme de la vision de l’homme et du monde dans la société (post)-moderne. Cette étude propose une réflexion sur la nécessité d’une conversion philosophique de celui qui s’engage dans l’apostolat de l’Église, en montrant trois points de blocage à dépasser dans la formulation du message évangélique. Cette conversion signifie une acceptation de la fin d’une époque de la transmission de la foi par l’intermédiaire de l’Église, en tant qu’un corps « politico-théologique ». Le premier point de blocage à dépasser est une absence de recherche visant une compréhension de la pensée post-moderne qui préconise la libération de l’homme. Le deuxième point de blocage consiste à ne lire l’agir du Christ dans le monde que par l’action de l’Église.

PL

W proklamowaniu wiary nie wystarczy samo przekonanie religijne. Dzisiejsze duszpasterstwo musi wziąć pod uwagę jako podstawową wykładnię zmianę paradygmatu wizji człowieka i świata w społeczeństwie (po)nowoczesnym. Studium to proponuje podjęcie refleksji zakładającej potrzebę nawrócenia filozoficznego osoby, która angażuje się w apostolat Kościoła; wskazuje trzy punkty pewnego zablokowania, które należy pokonać, w sformułowaniu przekazu ewangelicznego. Nawrócenie to oznacza zaakceptowanie końca epoki, w którym Kościół występował jako pośrednik w przekazywaniu wiary, formując wtedy rodzaj ciała „polityczno-teologicznego”. Pierwszym punktem blokady jest brak badań nad zrozumieniem myśli ponowoczesności, która uwypukla dążenie człowieka do wyzwolenia, drugim – odczytywanie działania Chrystusa w świecie wyłącznie przez pryzmat Kościoła. Aby pokonać ambiwalentne podejście do znaków czasów, w tym drugim wyzwaniu teologia winna zaproponować bardziej pneumatologiczną lekturę działania Boga w świecie.

EN

A simple religious conviction to proclaim faith is not enough. Today’s pastoral care must take into account the fundamental challenge of changing the paradigm of the vision of man and the world in postmodern society. This study proposes a reflection on the necessity of a philosophical conversion of the one who engages in the apostolate of the Church by demonstrating three points of blocking to be surpassed in the formulation of the evangelical message. Conversion means acceptance of an end of the epoch of the transmission of faith through the Church as a “politico-theological” body. The first point of overcoming is an absence of research aimed at an understanding of postmodern thinking which advocates the liberation of man. The second blocking point is a reading of the action of Christ in the world solely through the action of the Church.