W artykule zaprezentowano wybrane aforyzmy Stanisława Jerzego Leca, a niektóre z nich autor opatrzył filozoficznym komentarzem. Aforyzmy pogrupowano w siedem działów tematycznych: Wokół filozofii, Orientacja recentywistyczna, O Bogu, Religia, Sprawy ludzkie, Władza i totalitaryzm oraz O sobie samym. Celem niniejszego tekstu jest zatem z jednej strony popularyzacja aforyzmów Leca w środowisku naukowym, a z drugiej – pobudzenie do filozoficznej refleksji nad nimi.

Kai-Fu Lee, który jest jednym z czołowych specjalistów od SI w Chinach, wyraził pogląd, że miłość jest tym, co istotnie odróżnia nas od SI oraz stanowi o naszym człowieczeństwie. Autor artykułu prezentuje filozoficzno-psychologiczne uzasadnienie dla tego poglądu Lee.

Francis Fukuyama nie potrzebuje specjalnej prezentacji, ponieważ ten amerykański filozof polityczny zasłynął w świecie tezą o „końcu historii”. Autor omawia w artykule koncepcję thymos Fukuyamy, która została skrytykowana. Według autora, Fukuyama upraszcza rzeczywistość, kiedy z koncepcji thymos wywodzi przechodzenie państw do demokracji, co jest nieuzasadnione.

Benjamin Barber on the United States and the challenge of terrorism.

Chomsky, N., Hegemonia albo przetrwanie. Amerykańskie dążenie do globalnej dominacji, [Przeł.] W. Turopolski, Warszawa: Studio „Emka”, 2005.

The article presents shortly views of American thinkers about authenticity according to The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy from Internet. Later, the author presents own theory on this topic. At last, in the conlusions of the work there are the most important statements of the article.

The democratization of the world according to Samuel Huntington.

The future of America and the world according to Zbigniew Brzezinski.

Artykuł dyskutuje z teorią amerykańskiego politologa Samuela Huntingtona, który w swojej słynnej książce Zderzenie cywilizacji stwierdził, że istnieje cywilizacja islamska. Autor artykułu omawia historiozoficzne analizy islamu, które przeprowadzili: Oswald Spengler, Feliks Koneczny i Arnold Toynbee; wszyscy ci trzej myśliciele twierdzą, że istnieje jedna cywilizacja wiążąca się z islamem. Zdaniem autora artykułu możemy tę cywilizację nazywać orientalną. Artykuł prezentuje również teorię orientalnej cywilizacji wedle wymienionych klasyków historiozofii.

'...In these pages I consider Reason in its relation to these contrasted aspects of history. Reason is the self-discipline of the originative element in history. Apart from the operations of Reason, this element is anarchic.' -From the Summary.

In the first section, I will argue that the folk concept of necessary conditions for intentional action needs refinement. In the second and third sections, I will identify some additional issues one would need to explore in con- structing a statement of individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for intentional action. I will conclude with a brief discussion of the conceptual analyst’s task.

This paper raises a pair of objections to the novel libertarian position advanced in Robert Kane's recent book, The Significance of Free Will.The first objection's target is a central element in Kane's intriguing response to what he calls the "Intelligibility" and "Existence" questions about free will. It is argued that this response is undermined by considerations of luck.The second objection is directed at a portion of Kane's answer to what he calls "The Significance Question" about free will: "Why do we, (...) or should we, want to possess a free will that is incompatible with determinism? Is it a kind of freedom 'worth wanting'... and, if so, why?" A desire for "objective worth" has a featured role in his answer. However, a compatibilist can have that desire. (shrink)

What limits should there be on the areas of life that are governed by market forces? For many years, no one seriously defended the buying and selling votes for political elections. In recent years, however, this situation has changed, with a number of authors defending the permissibility of vote markets. One popular objection to such markets is that they would lead to a tyranny of wealth, where the poor are politically dominated by the rich. In a recent paper, Taylor :313–328, (...) 2017. doi: 10.1007/s11158-016-9327-0) has argued that this objection can be avoided if certain restrictions are placed on vote markets. In this paper we will argue that this attempt to rebut an argument against vote markets is unsuccessful. Either vote markets secure their purported benefits but then they inevitably lead to a tyranny of wealth, or they are restricted so heavily that they lack the features that have been claimed to make vote markets attractive in the first place. Using Taylor’s proposal as a test case, we make the more general claim that vote markets cannot avoid the tyranny of wealth objection and bring about their supposed benefits at the same time. (shrink)

Mele's chapter addresses two primary aims. The first is to develop an experimentally useful conception of conscious deciding. The second is to challenge a certain source of skepticism about free will: the belief that conscious decisions and intentions are never involved in producing corresponding overt actions. The challenge Mele develops has a positive dimension that accords with the aims of this volume: It sheds light on a way in which some conscious decisions and intentions do seem to be efficacious.

It is sometimes suggested that if, whenever we act intentionally, we do, or try to do, what we are most strongly motivated to do at the time, then we are at the mercy of whatever desire happens to be strongest at the time. I have argued elsewhere that this is false (Mele 1987, ch. 5; 1992, ch. 4; 1995, ch. 3; 1996). This essay provides another route to that conclusion, but that is not my primary aim. The goal of this (...) paper is to display the bearing of some well-known experiments by physiologist Benjamin Libet on this issue. Philosophical discussion of these experiments has focused on Libet's claims about consciousness. The significance of these experiments for the topics of motivation and agential control also merits serious attention. (shrink)

Many issues at the heart of the philosophy of action and of philosophical work on free will are framed partly in terms of causation. The leading approach to understanding both the nature of action and the explanation or production of actions emphasizes causation. What may be termed standardcausalism is the conjunction of the following two theses: firstly, an event's being an action depends on how it was caused; and secondly, proper explanations of actions are causal explanations. Important questions debated in (...) the literature on free will include: is an action's being deterministically caused incompatible with its being freely performed? Are actions free only if they are indeterministically caused? Does the indeterministic causation of an action preclude its being freely performed? Does free action require agent causation? This article concentrates on issues about action and free will that centrally involve causation. (shrink)

Autonomy, as I understand it, is associated with a family of freedom concepts: free will, free choice, free action, and the like. In much of the philosophical literature discussed in this chapter, issues are framed in terms of freedom rather than autonomy, but we are talking about (aspects of) the same thing. Libertarians argue that determinism precludes autonomy by, for example, precluding an agent's being ultimately responsible for anything. Some compatibilist believers in autonomy argue that libertarians rely on indeterminism in (...) a way that deprives us of autonomy-level control over our decisions. Theorists who contend that no human being is autonomous can benefit from arguments on both sides, alleging that libertarians decisively reveal the ordinary person's notion of autonomy, an incompatibilist notion, and that compatibilist critics of libertarianism show that the notion is incoherent or unsatis-fiable. Is there a way to use the resources both of libertarianism and of compatibilism in defending the following thesis: The claim that there are autonomous human beings is more credible than the claim that there are none? -/- I believe that the answer is “yes.” I defended that answer in Autonomous Agents. Part of my strategy was to develop an account of an ideally self-controlled agent (where self-control is understood as the contrary of akrasia [roughly, weakness of will]), to argue that even such an agent may fall short of autonomy, and to ask what may be added to ideal self-control to yield autonomy. I offered two answers, one for compatibilists and another for libertarians. I then argued that a certain disjunctive thesis involving both answers (identified in Section 4 below) is more credible than the thesis that there are no autonomous human beings. (shrink)

. I find it impossible to imagine that this book will not remain indefinitely the very best book of its sort."—Review of Metaphysics "The confrontation or conjunction of Ayer and Russell is a notable event and has produced a remarkable ...