Cosmopolitanism and its Predicaments

The aim of my paper is to show the discussion concerning the idea of cosmopolitan society. I intend to examine the structure and content of the argumentation which put into question the very notion of cosmopolitanism, as well as the contemporary content of this concept. I will look at nationalistic discourse as presented, for instance, by Gertrude Himmelfarb, which puts emphasis on national values as an indispensable part of group and individual identity. On the other hand, I am going to analyze left-wing evaluation of cosmopolitanism (for instance, that of Chantal Mouffe) as an ideologically motivated attempt to hide the real contradictions of the contemporary world. Finally, I will prove that these critiques cannot undermine the concept of cosmopolitanism, but they force us to rethink a way in which cosmopolitan society can be achieved. If cosmopolitan society is to emerge, we need to reconstruct the idea of democracy and the notion of multi-cultural pluralistic society. I propose such rethinking of cosmopolitanism by the introduction of the notion of “dialogical cosmopolitanism,” which refers to M.M. Bakhtin’s concept of dialogue and G.H. Mead’s idea of “taking the role of the other.”     

On infinite EPR-like correlations

The paper investigates, in the framework of branching space–times, whether an infinite EPR-like correlation which does not involve finite EPR-like correlations is possible. The authors read earlier versions of this paper at the seminar ‘Chaos and Quantum Information’ at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków on April 16, 2007 and at the seminar ‘On Determinism’ at the University of Bonn on April 20, 2007.     

关于所谓的基督教危机

L．科拉科夫斯基（1927--2009）,东欧新马克思主义的代表人物、波兰著名的哲学家,西方哲学史专家。对古希腊哲学、中世纪哲学、欧洲大陆哲学、德国古典哲学、人本主义、实证主义、分析哲学,现象学都十分熟悉,并撰写了许多相关领域的论文,多部论著还被翻译成数十种文字,在西方哲学界影响很大,其宗教批判理论更是极富创见性。本文中,针对学界普遍关注的所谓基督教危机问题,科拉科夫斯基给出了自己的答案。在他看来,基于基督教最原初的主旨和最本真的意义,今天任何对于基督教正在发生危机并走向穷途末路的断言都是轻率和不负责任的。     

Paradoxes of social consciousness under socialism

Born in 1943. Professor of philosophy at the University of Poznan, together with Jerzy Kmita continued the work of Jerzy Giedymin in the Poznan School of a Marxian methodology of science (idealizational theory of science, categorial theory of dialectics, humanistic interpretation, and since the rise of the Solidarity movement the theory of non-Marxian historical materialism). Editor ofPoznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities (Rodopi, Amsterdam) and author of numerous articles and monographs.     

Utopia and history. Some remarks about Nikolai Berdjaev’s struggle with history

The article deals with the philosophy of Nikolai Berdjaev (1874–1948), which he formulated between The Philosophy of Inequality (written in 1918, but published in 1923) and The New Middle-Ages (1924). Berdjaev’s philosophy is analyzed in the context of the Russian Revolution of 1917 and its aftermath. The other point of reference is the crisis of culture and civilisation, which affected the West in the inter-war period. Berdjaev’s position has been interpreted in view of the archetypal myth of the struggle of the two principles, the principle of order (cosmos) and the forces of destruction (chaos). This myth is tied to the millenialist world view. Berdjaev took an anti-utopian stance. He juxtaposed the utopian-revolutionary principle with the hierarchical-creative one. From this position he criticized among others democracy, liberalism and socialism. In the midst of the crisis of the 1920s he remarked the possibility of spiritual rejuvenation putting forward the concept of the New Middle-Ages. One can say that at that time Berdjaev’s philosophy evolved within the conservative-creative framework, from the utopia of conservatism to the utopia of ‘free creativity’.