Popyt na zawody i kompetencje na podlaskim rynku pracy a potrzeby pracodawców w zakresie kształcenia ustawicznego pracowników w wieku 45 lat i więcej Katarzyna Baczyńska-Koc, Magdalena Borys, Andrzej Klimczuk, Iwona Pietrzak, Bogusław Plawgo, Katarzyna Radziewicz, Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Cecylia Sadowska-Snarska & Justyna Żynel-Etel .

This book is about beliefs, language, communication and cognition. It deals with the fundamental issue of the interpretation of the speaker's utterance expressing a belief and reporting on beliefs of other people in the form of oratio obliqua. The main aim of the book is to present a new account of the problem of interpreting utterances expressing beliefs and belief reports in terms of an approach called Default Semantics.

The article provides an introduction to the anthology devoted to studying theories and practices of discourses of exclusion. Framing the discussion by references to Kimberlé Crenshaw’s notion of intersectionality and Michel Foucault’s conceptualization of the relations between discourse and power, the essay stresses the multiple forms of exclusion and entangled power differentials that determine a person’s identity and social status and argues for the need to employ an interdisciplinary perspective. The overview of the issues analyzed in the anthology is guided (...) by the recognition of the complex links between theory and practice and the awareness that exclusions reinforce precarity and dismantle networks of support. (shrink)

The objective of this paper is to show how methods rooted in formal logic may be used to analyze socially important processes of persuasion. A formal approach to the theory of persuasion enables us to thoroughly research issues crucial in everyday life such as: how we argue, why we quarrel, where we are efficient in persuasion, when do we win a negotiation, how we influence others’ decisions, and the kinds of argumentative strategies that are apt to yield more accurate beliefs (...) for all parties involved.I concentrate on three aspects of persuasion practice: nature, success and cognitive value of argumentation process. From a logical perspective, I understand argumentation as reasoning which, after initiation through the opponent’s disagreement, is deployed by the proponent in order to persuade the audience to believe his thesis. Furthermore, I attempt to determine the ways in which we succeed in persuading others. Lastly, I try to specify when an argument is cognitively valuable and when it is reliable, in the sense that it helps us to track the truth. In order to analyze these matters, I investigate argumentation on two independent levels. The subjective level of people’s beliefs is the essential foundation of all persuasion -- every time we aim to make the audience believe our opinions and /or change their decisions. The second level is the objective field of truthfulness, where we consider whether a given argumentation will lead us to true or false conclusions. (shrink)

The aim of the paper is to propose a framework for the structure of persuasive communica-tion based on the Elaboration Likelihood Model by Petty and Cacioppo, the Inference Anchoring Theory by Budzynska and Reed and the Interpersonal Argumentation Model by Budzynska. The ELM suggests that there are two routes to persuasion: central and peripheral. IAT assumes that com-munication acts generate their contents and inferences by means of illocutionary connections. The model of IP-argumentation provides the general representation of arguments in which (...) the proponent refers to com-munication acts of some participant of communication. The paper discusses where exactly means of the central and peripheral routes operate in the structure of persuasive communication and argumentation. (shrink)

v. 1. Meanings and representations -- v. 2. Discourse strategies.

The dynamics of changes in science inevitably, but also increasingly urgently begins to include ethical reflection. These issues include such problems as: the gap between the prestige of scientific and didactic activity, building scientific achievements solely through the prism of their carrying capacity, or the lack of influence of science on social and cultural life. The dominant role in shaping teaching standards is played by such phenomena as parameterization, indexing, coefficients or accreditation, while the normative space of scientific activity is (...) no longer subject to such obvious standardization. The educational and cultural role of the people of science devalues towards entrepreneurship and effectiveness. Based on Henryk Elzenberg’s views on the excess of the importance of science to the detriment of evaluative thinking, it can be noted that contemporary academic expertise does not seem to pursue any axiological connotations, which in the long run is a highly disturbing advantage for culture. (shrink)

The paper investigates the various factors from a socio-cultural perspective that have a bearing on the intercultural couple’s marital satisfaction in Westerner and non-Westerner relationships, and how cultural differences may potentially amplify the difficulties, which non-intercultural couples themselves are already likely to face. These factors include acculturation, language and communication, attitudes toward marriage, individual traits and behaviours, support of the family, societal views, gender roles, managing of the household finances and child rearing. Certain theories are also highlighted in an attempt (...) to explain why these cultural differences have such a profound effect on the marital satisfaction of intercultural couples. (shrink)

The dissertation develops a conception of action based on the concept of practical task-responsibility rather than on the concept of intention. It answers two problems. First, it grounds the distinction between an action and a mere happening, thus meeting Wittgenstein's challenge to explain what is the difference between an agent's raising her arm and her arm rising? Second, it grounds the distinction between acting for a reason and acting while merely having a reason, thus meeting Davidson's challenge to give an (...) account of the explanatory force of reasons. ;One source of resistance to an account of action in terms of normative expectations rather than in terms of intentions comes from explanatory individualism. The explanatory individualist argues that it is ultimately the intentional attitudes of the agent rather than normative expectations of other people that are relevant to the way in which we explain one another's actions, and that they ought to figure in the account of the nature of action. I defend explanatory nonindividualism, according to which we sometimes act on our own intentions and desires but sometimes on the normative expectations and desires of others . Explanatory nonindividualism is fortified by a selectional account of the explanatory force of reasons. I demonstrate that Davidson's challenge can be met by identifying reasons with selectional criteria rather than with causes. ;In response to Wittgenstein's challenge, I propose that we understand what it is to be an action not in terms of a performance being intentional under a description, but in terms of it being reasonable to expect a performance of the agent under some description. Only one concept of reasonableness is necessary to make the distinction between actions and mere happenings, and I explicate that concept. In addition to accounting for actions that are intentional under some description, the account also captures cases that are not so straightforwardly captured by that criterion . Moreover, cases of so-called basic wayward causal chains are excluded from qualifying as actions. (shrink)

In the paper I want to give a new account of notions of reasoning, argumentation, and persuasion. The aim of it is to resolve problems of the traditional accounts. The investigation uses the issue of circular reasoning. These types of arguments are considered a fallacy in informal logic, whereas formal logic holds that they are valid. The new account suggests a possibility of reconciliation of the informal and formal perspective.

A: Things that are equal to the same are equal to each other. B: The two sides of this triangle are things that are equal to the same. Z: So, the two sides of this triangle are equal to each other. Achilles fails because he encounters an infinite progression of hidden premises of the form “If all the premises of the argument are true, the conclusion is true”. In [a1], the hidden premise is H1 “If A and B then Z” (...) – surely, if one did not believe that H1 is true, one would have a reason not to accept the conclusion Z. So, the argument [a2] must lead to conclusion Z from A, B and H1. But, one will have to supplement [a2] with H2: “If A and B and H1 then Z” since if one did not believe H2 one would have a reason not to draw conclusion Z. And so on ad infinitum. The puzzle can be seen as arising through the application of an apparently innocent principle of discerning missing premises (§2). If looked at in this light, the standard response given to the paradox does not so much resolve the puzzle as legislates against it being raised with respect to principles of inference (§3). I argue that a fundamental ambiguity infests the test for what is a missing premise (§4). Moreover, it explains why the puzzle appears to, though it does not (§5), arise. I end with some comments on the usefulness of the test (§6). (shrink)

The first comprehensive study of Santayana’s political thought as connected to his cultural criticism. It ranges over topics such as Santayana’s political ontology, his criticism of democracy, liberalism, and communism, his views on freedom and forms of human servitude.

All the authors who have contributed to Looking Back to See the Future have taken up the challenge to inter-disciplinarily investigate the ambiguous concepts of sins, vices and virtues. Their illuminating chapters test the definitions and applications of these religio-cultural categories in the contexts of the distant past as well as our contemporary, globalised, consumerist present; but they all do it for the sake of catching a glimpse of their and our future. By looking into religious and philosophical treatises, paraliterary (...) and literary texts as well as everyday practices, the authors prove that the interpretations of what constitutes sin, vice and virtue are becoming more and more difficult in the twenty-first century. (shrink)