Anna Brożek

Carnap visited Poland once, at the end of 1930. Later, he wrote is his Autobiography: "I left Warsaw grateful for many stimulating suggestions and the fruitful exchange of ideas which I enjoyed". Thanks to the content of Carnap’s Diaries,  as well as the preserved correspondence with members of the Lvov–Warsaw School, we know the details of his visit, including personal meetings with Polish scholars. The present paper concentrates on Carnap’s lectures and reactions to them. It also presents some interpersonal relations between Carnap and representatives of the LWS.

It is hard to imagine our life without questions. They facilitate orientation in our environment, enable interpersonal communication and make the acquisition of knowledge possible. Questions direct scientific research, are used as research tools and are an important medium of transferring knowledge in teaching.
The book is intended as a par excellence philosophical monograph of the theory of questions, presenting the most important erotetic problems, their general background and selected practical applications. It is prepared in all fairness to results acquired in the framework of the logical theories of questions but goes beyond this framework.

Artykuł przedstawia metodę opisu analitycznego w zastosowaniu do teorii pytań. Metoda ta, zrekonstruowana przez Tadeusza Czeżowskiego, a aplikowana szeroko w Szkole Lwowsko-‑Warszawskiej, znajduje zastosowanie przede wszystkim na preteoretycznym etapie badań, tj. do konstrukcji siatki pojęciowej danej dyscypliny i klasyfikacji dziedziny badań. Jako przykład zastosowania tej metody wskazana została teoria pytań Kazimierza Ajdukiewicza oraz jej rozwinięcia, a zwłaszcza opublikowana niedawno monografia Adama Jonkisza. Omówione zostały metody alternatywne względem opisu analitycznego ze względu na dobór materiału empirycznego i perspektywę teoretyczną. Na tym tle pokazane zostały różnice między odmiennymi nurtami w badaniach erotetycznych i źródła nieporozumień między przedstawicielami tych nurtów.

The aim of the paper is to present critical analysis of Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz's theory of questions. Generally, the author concentrates on four elements of Ajdukiewicz's theory of questions: the structure of question, the classification of questions, the concept of presuppositions of questions and the concept of answer. Ajdukiewicz's contributions in the domain of logic of questions are unquestionable. However, there are still many 'gaps' in his conception of questions that need to be filled. He proposes some improvements to this conception. They include an explication of the concepts of 'query' and 'tenor', a classification of complementation questions by use of categorial grammar, enriching the concept of 'assumptions' by the concept of 'pragmatic assumptions', and an explication of the concept of 'answer' (in general).

It is not surprising for us that thought experiments are so popular among philosophers and among readers of some philosophical journals. As we showed in our paper — they are either would-be real experiments or stimulators of revealing convictions and opinions of people on which experiments are prosecuted. Besides the fact that thought experiments fulfill an illustrative and a fortiori persuasive function, they do not play any important theoretical role. They are simply exemplifications — usually inventive and funny ones — of some «pure» processes of reasoning. Their popularity has its source in the fact that since their childhood people like reading books with… illustrations. There would be nothing wrong with making use of such illustrations if texts in which they are described contained clearly expressed theses and transparently presented argumentation. Unfortunately — texts illustrated by thought experiments are lacking of such clarity and transparency. This is probably the reason...

1 I would like to thank the Reviewers for their comments that helped me to improve this paper. A shortened, simplified Polish version of this paper was published in the journal Filozofuj! (6/2020). 2 J.M. Bocheński, Między logiką a wiarą. Rozmowa z Janem Parysem [Between Logic and Faith: An Interview with Jan Parys], Montricher 1988, p. 98. Unless otherwise stated, all translations from Polish are my own. 3 Ibid., pp. 85–86. Logical Analysis against Superstitions: Józef M. Bocheński on the Social Role of Philosophy

In the paper, Jan Łukasiewicz’s program of the logicization of philosophy is presented and discussed. Łukasiewicz, known mostly for his invention of trivalent logic as well as his achievements in propositional calculus and metalogic, had always been concerned with the methodological condition of philosophy. He finally found “the measure of exactness” in mathematical logic. According to him, only the use of logical tools
may provide philosophical investigations with an appropriate level of exactness. He expressed his views most firmly and directly in the paper, “A call for the method of Philosophy” (the translation of this paper is included in an “Appendix”). Łukasiewicz proposed giving philosophical theories the form of axiomatic systems by indicating the primitive terms of their language, selecting suitable axioms, and explicitly determining the applied rules of inference. All the theses of these systems should be consequences of the accepted axioms and confronted with the data of experience and the results of science. Łukasiewicz’s program is presented together with its inspirations and prospects.

Our conception of thought experiment may be summarized as follows. Let us suppose that we want to know what is entailed by the occurrence of a given state of affairs αk. Let us call the state of affairs entailed by it ‘βk’. If αk is «ready», it is sufficient to conduct respective observation: thanks to it we shall «see» βk. Otherwise, we have to bring out the occurrence of αk. This is what real experiment consists in. We have called αk “the basis of experiment”, and we call βk — “the result of experiment”. If establishing that the occurrence of αk entails the occurrence of βk is the first step to put the hypothesis — let us call it ‘γ’ — stating that the occurrence of the phenomenon α entails the occurrence of the phenomenon β, the experiment is heuristic (α is here a type of states of affairs exemplified by αk, and β — is a type of states of affairs exemplified by βk). Other experiments are of testing character. If we already had put γ, then establishing that the occurrence of αk e...

Kazimierz Twardowski was the founder of the Lvov-Warsaw School, one of the greatest phenomena in the European culture. The School had its representatives in all scientific disciplines, logic and mathematics including. Among his pupils are such great figures of European philosophy like: Jan Łukasiewicz, Stanislaw Leśniewski, Tadeusz Kotarbinski, Wladyslaw Tatarkiewicz and Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz. The paper presents his life and various fields of his rich activity, as well as the list of his main works and the greatest achievements in philosophy. He is best known in the world as the author of the distinction presentation-object-content, act-product, as well as the supporter of the postulate of clarity of thought and speech and the critic of psychologism, relativity of truth, symbolomania and pragmatophobia in science.

In this chapter, it is assumed that two kinds of relations are essential to any philosophical school. Firstly, there are interpersonal relations between members of the school, including teacher–student relations. Secondly, there are intertextual relations between elements of output the school, namely between problems, conceptual schemes, methods or theories accepted by various representatives. The chapter consists of two parts. In the first part, the conceptual scheme for analysis of various types of interpersonal and intertextual relations is provided. It is claimed that contact between philosophers (oral or written, unilateral or bilateral) is a necessary but not sufficient element of influence of one philosopher on another. The influence takes place if the contact between philosophers results in some actions or convictions of one of them. The influence may be positive or negative. It is also the case that one may be more or less aware of being influenced by someone else. The seco...

The term “performative” is used in at least two different senses. In the first sense, performatives are generatives, i.e. expressions by the use of which one creates new deontic states of affairs on the ground of extralinguistic conventions. In the second sense, performatives are operatives, i.e. expressions which contain verbal predicates and state their own utterances. In the article, both these types of expressions are compared to the class of imperatives which are characterized as expressions of the form “Let x see to it that p” and typically express wishes. It is claimed that (1) only these imperatives are generatives which are uttered by deontic authorities, (2) no imperative is an operative sensu stricto; (3) imperative operatives are used instead of “pure” imperatives in order to emphasize the force of resolution.

In this article, Józef M. Bocheński is presented as a representative of the methodological tendencies of the Lvov–Warsaw School (LWS). Special attention is given to the reconstructive analysis of concepts, the categorial trait of this procedure, and examples of its application by Bocheński. First, some historical and substantial arguments are presented for including Bocheński in the LWS. Secondly, the procedure of the reconstruction of concepts applied in the LWS is characterized. Then the attention turns to the categorial trait of the analysis as indicated by Bocheński. Finally, two examples of Bocheński’s categorial reconstruction of concepts are presented. The article ends with a recapitulation and general remarks.

In March 1930, Alfred Tarski visited Vienna and delivered few lectures which presented the achievements of the logical branch of the Lvov-Warsaw School. Rudolf Carnap was one of the most careful listeners of these lectures. The same year, in November, Carnap, invited by the Warsaw Philosophical Society, visited Warsaw where he gave three lectures. This was an opportunity for him to meet such members the Lvov-Warsaw School as Jan Łukasiewicz, Stanisław Leśniewski, Tadeusz Kotarbiński, and others. Many years later, Carnap reminisced that he left Warsaw “grateful for many stimulating suggestions and the fruitful exchange of ideas”.In the paper, I reconstruct the details of Carnap’s visit in Warsaw based on Carnap’s diaries, reports published in the Polish Journal Ruch Filozoficzny [Philosophical Movement] and some correspondence. I also discuss some problems presented by Carnap in Warsaw lectures and compare his views to the positons of members of the Lvov-Warsaw School. These problems...

Artykuł zawiera zarys rekonstrukcji poglądów etycznych Tadeusza Kotarbińskiego. Analiza pism etycznych Kotarbińskiego — niestety dalekich od ideału precyzji — pozwala sądzić, że na jego system etyczny składają się m.in. następujące tezy. Podstawową negatywną normą moralną jest norma „Nie powinieneś nikomu czynić zła ponad niezbędną potrzebę”, a podstawową pozytywną normą moralną jest norma „Powinieneś komuś czynić dobro”; stąd etykę Kotarbińskiego wolno nazwać „altruizmem lokalnym”. Za naczelną cnotę moralną uznaje Kotarbiński opiekuńczość (przeciwstawioną samolubności); stąd jego system etyczny nazywany bywa „etyką spolegliwego opiekuna”. Działanie opiekuna polegać powinno przede wszystkim na zapobieganiu i usuwaniu nieszczęścia; stąd system etyczny Kotarbińskiego wolno nazwać „minimalistycznym”. Normy etyczne uzasadniane są za pomocą procedury indukcyjnej wspartej intuicją etyczną. Najpierw intuicyjnie rozpoznajemy czyny ewidentnie dobre lub ewidentnie haniebne, a następnie wyabst...

According to Józef M. Bocheński, philosophers should analyze and not moralize. Bocheński also wrote that the philosophers’ aim is to battle with superstitions. The present paper concerns the question of how philosophical analysis may serve this aim. In the first part of the paper, the kinds and tools of philosophical analysis are presented. In particular, the objects of philosophical analysis (concepts and statements) as well as logical “instruments” of analysis are discussed. In the second part, the concept of superstition (or prejudice) is analyzed. Taking Bocheński’s definition as the point of departure, some essential distinctions involved in this concept are explained, for instance the distinction between truthfulness of a statement and somebody’s acceptance of a statement, and the distinction between a false statement and an obviously false statement. Next, the mechanism of fighting against superstitions by means of analysis is shown using examples taken from Bocheński’s book Sto zabobonów [One Hundred Superstitions] (1987). Superstitions connected with authority, patriotism, and tolerance are analyzed.

The Polish branch of analytic philosophy, the Lvov-Warsaw School, was initiated by Kazimierz Twardowski, a student of Franz Brentano. Twardowski's aim was to vaccinate Brentano's spirit into Polish philosophy. He succeeded and Brentano's impact on Polish philosophy was deep and versatile. Moreover, for few decades, Brentano's ideas were much more popular among members of the Lvov-Warsaw School than in other centers of analytic philosophy. The paper provides an overview of Brentano's direct and indirect impact on representatives of the Lvov-Warsaw School. Various spheres of infuence, including the conception of philosophy , logic, methodology, ontology, and ethics as well as teaching philosophy are taken into considerations. This overview is preceded by some distinctions on the concept of inluence.

Recently the term "interdisciplinary" is becoming more and more popular. Despite this, there is no satisfactory definition of "interdisciplinary studies." That is why both scholars and grant-funding institutions have no good criteria for distinguishing essential usages of this term from inessential ones. The first part of this paper aims to provide an approximate analysis of the concept of interdisciplinarity, that is a definition indicating some essential examples of interdisciplinarity and listing some exemplifications of research which are not interdisciplinary in any essential sense of the word. Some problems of interdisciplinary research, including the assumed division and hierarchy of sciences as well as the need for a specific language of interdisciplinary research is discussed. In the second part of the paper, Kazimierz Twardowski's research is discussed as an example of interdisciplinarity in one of the essential senses of the word. His investigations are contrasted with the investigations of those of his students, namely Jan Łukasiewicz and Władysław Witwicki, who became "intradisciplinary" researchers. Keywords Analysis-hierarchy of sciences-interdisciplinarity-intradisciplinarity-Jan Łukasiewicz-Kazimierz Twardowski 1 Introduction1 The first part of my paper concerns the concept of interdisciplinary research. In the second part, I try to show in which sense the research in the Lvov-Warsaw School falls under the concepts of interdisciplinarity proposed in the first part.

Wstęp Filozoficzną Szkołę Lwowsko-Warszawską nazwano "najwybitniejszą polską formacją filozoficzną", "największym polskim przedsięwzięciem zbiorowym", "momentem wielkości filozofii polskiej, chwilą jej chwały". Jest ona bez wątpienia fenomenem, czyli zjawiskiem niezwykłym i ważnym, zarówno w dziejach kultury polskiej, jak i dziejach filozofii in toto. Fenomen Szkoły Lwowsko-Warszawskiej polega m.in. na tym, że łamie ona kilka stereotypów. Zgodnie z jednym z takich stereotypów-rozpowszechnionym od paru stuleci-Polacy to indywidualiści, którzy nie potrafią ze sobą współpracować. Tymczasem Szkoła Lwowsko-Warszawska-dalej krótko: SLW-jest dziełem grupowym, ale nie indywidualnym, chociaż skądinąd jest w tej grupie wiele wybitnych indywidualności. Inny stereotyp wyraża się w przekonaniu, że na prawdziwy sukces w nauce potrzebna jest nieprzerwana praca wielu pokoleń i dogodne warunki polityczne. Dzieje SLW są świadectwem tego, że osiągnąć sukces w nauce można nawet w stosunkowo krótkim przedziale czasowym i w warunkach bardzo trudnych: że w ciągu paru dekad i w skomplikowanej sytuacji politycznej udało się stworzyć na ziemiach polskich grupę, która wydała trwałe i wybitne owoce. Po trzecie, niektórzy mówią o Polakach, że nie tylko nie potrafią ze sobą współpracować, ale nie potrafią w ogóle pracować wytrwale i rzetelnie. Otóż SLW nie zaistniałaby, gdyby nie wytrwały i rzetelny wysiłek wielu tworzących ją indywidualności i właściwy całej grupie etos pracy. SLW może się poszczycić niemałą liczbą rezultatów, które uzyskały status jej osiągnięć sztandarowych. Są to np. Twardowskiego odróżnienie przedmiot-treść przedstawienia i czynność-wytwór oraz jego krytyka relatywizmu aletycznego, logiki wielowartościowe i metalogika Łukasiewicza, systemy Leśniewskiego, gramatyka kategorialna, teoria znaczenia i radykalny konwencjonalizm Ajdukiewicza, reizm i etyka niezależna Kotarbińskiego, semantyczna definicja prawdy Tarskiego, historia logiki i teoria autorytetu Bocheńskiego, koncepcja nauki o nauce sformułowana przez Ossowskich i nauki o moralności autorstwa Ossowskiej, eksplikacja konwencjonalizmu dokonana przez Dąmbską, Wielka Teoria piękna i idea estetyki implicite Tatarkiewicza itd. SLW była jednak silna nie tylko swymi sztandarowymi osiągnięciami. Jej przedstawiciele zajmowali się tym typem filozofii, w którym chodzi o rozwiązywanie drobnych, dobrze postawionych problemów filozoficznych.