CEL NAUKOWY: Celem badań będzie przemyślenie na nowo relacji pomiędzy filozofią polityki a prakty... more CEL NAUKOWY: Celem badań będzie przemyślenie na nowo relacji pomiędzy filozofią polityki a praktyką polityczną. Jako przesłanki w tych analizach zostaną wykorzystane poglądy Michaela Oakeshotta, Costicy Bradatana i Sokratesa. Można spróbować wskazać nowe kryterium odróżnienia tych dwóch obszarów, odwołując się częściowo do tradycji sceptycznej, akcentującej niedopowiedzenie i nieskrępowanie. PROBLEM i METODY BADAWCZE: Artykuł zawiera rozważania metafilozoficzne odnoszące się do obszaru filozofii polityki. Wykorzystane zostaną przede wszystkim metody filozoficzne stosowane na metapoziomie w stosunku do dociekań z zakresu filozofii polityki. PROCES WYWODU: Najpierw postaram się dookreślić frazę „filozofia polityki” i „filozofia polityczna”. W dalszej części wywodu przedstawię poglądy Oakeshotta i Bradatana dotyczące filozofii i polityki. Finalnie skontrastuję te ustalenia z wizerunkiem Sokratesa i ukażę pola synergii. WYNIKI ANALIZY NAUKOWEJ: Analizy z zakresu metafilozofii, w odniesi...
Recenzja książki Matuša Porubjaka Vôl’a (k) celku Človek a spoločenstvo rečou Homéra a Theognida ... more Recenzja książki Matuša Porubjaka Vôl’a (k) celku Človek a spoločenstvo rečou Homéra a Theognida Pusté Úlany: Schola Pholosophica, 2010
The present article attempts to shed light on the sources of philosophical criticism of early Gre... more The present article attempts to shed light on the sources of philosophical criticism of early Greece and on the origins of the critical attitude adopted by the thinkers of the period. Above all, however, reflections presented hereby are meant to serve as a backdrop for analyses of a much broader scope. The study seeks to identify the defining characteristics of early Greek criticism, upon which basis the author puts forth a proposition for a general typology of its forms. Complementing the present comments is a brief discussion of the suggested types of philosophical criticism in light of the views of some of the leading philosophers of the time
Człowiek jest zmuszony uświęcać czas, zaburzać jego monotonną harmonię, wytyczać przełomy i wskaz... more Człowiek jest zmuszony uświęcać czas, zaburzać jego monotonną harmonię, wytyczać przełomy i wskazywać zakola tej wiecznej rzeki. Musi to czynić, aby porównywać, musi rozszczepiać, aby połączyć, musi wreszcie zapaść się w noc, aby powtórnie ujrzeć dzień; musi także rozpoznawać odróżnione strony, obracać w palcach monetę dziejów, aby ujrzeć ich awers i rewers. Jak wygląda filozofia po tej i tamtej stronie wieku? To miejsce w czasie, w którym jesteśmy, stanowi pretekst do namysłu nad stanem filozofii. Na czym jednak ten namysł ma polegać? Wydaje się, że należy wsłuchać się w głos Eurypidesa i popłynąć tam, gdzie wszystkie rzeki — ku źródłom. Rozstrzygającą kwestią w namyśle nad stanem filozofii jest diagnoza greckiej ontologii, która stanowi właśnie owo źródło wszelkich późniejszych systemów filozoficznych, bez względu na to, czy ich twórcy świadomie się do tego przyznają, czy też skrzętnie to ukrywają. Kluczową zaś postacią i inicjatorem greckiej ontologii jest Parmenides z Elei
W czasach, w których głosi się „śmierć” filozofii, pytaniem nie pozbawionym sensu, a ponadto zawi... more W czasach, w których głosi się „śmierć” filozofii, pytaniem nie pozbawionym sensu, a ponadto zawierającym odrobinę koniecznej przekory pozostaje wciąż pytanie o początek filozofii. Ten zwrot w stronę myśli greckiej, poza podkreśleniem jej niepodważalnej doniosłości, ma również na celu wydobywanie fundamentalnych idei, które choć przytłumione w swojej jawności, stanowią niezbywalne podłoże filozofii jako takiej..
The aim of my paper is to indicate the Greek antecedents of select conceptions in the field of mo... more The aim of my paper is to indicate the Greek antecedents of select conceptions in the field of modern political philosophy and to reveal the durability of certain interpretations of Greek skepticism and fallibilism in fields other than traditionally-understood ancient epistemology. My reflections concentrate on the views of M. Oakeshott and K.R. Popper and are based above all on their correspondence from 1948. I attempt to show the similarities and differences in these views from the perspective of anti-dogmatic criticism, whose roots are located in Greek thought. In this sense, the philosophy of politics will be treated as a sort of adaptational test of the life-span of ancient ideas, in this case – to particular versions of skepticism and fallibilism. In this context, special attention should be paid to problems connected with man’s cognitive limitations; the way rationalism is understood; the critique of Utopianism; and the role of tradition and humility in human life.
The following article constitutes an introduction to the problem of critical thinking and philoso... more The following article constitutes an introduction to the problem of critical thinking and philosophical criticism. Above all, the main problem areas and ways of grasping these problems will be outlined. The possible relations between criticism and philosophy will be subject to analysis, enabling a better grasp of the specificity of philosophical criticism. Three basic models of these relations will be distinguished: (1) the identity of criticism and philosophy, (2) the subordinance of criticism to philosophy, and (3) the superordinance of criticism to philosophy. In addition, the main forms of criticism will be discussed, namely: separative criticism, antidogmatic criticism, and epistemological criticism. The goal of these reflections is to clarify the essence of both critical thinking and philosophical criticism.
Analyses of the present dynamics of change in Europe are not complete without taking into account... more Analyses of the present dynamics of change in Europe are not complete without taking into account the role and function of the critical approach as a founding element of European culture. An appreciation of critical thinking must go hand-in-hand with refl ection on its essence, forms, and centuries-long tradition. The chapters of this book contain both historical-philosophical and problem-oriented analyses, indicating the relationships between philosophical criticism and rationalism, logic, scepticism, atheism, dialectic procedure, and philosophical counseling, among others. The book should interest not only humanities scholars, but also scholars in other fi elds, as the development of an anti-dogmatic critical approach is a lasting and indispensible challenge for all disciplines.
Er(r)go Teoria - Literatura - Kultura, 43(2), 2021
The purpose of the considerations presented in this article is to analyze the status of philosoph... more The purpose of the considerations presented in this article is to analyze the status of philosophy in terms of its problem-solving potential, or, more simply, to trace the possible topographies of a philosophical path. The point of departure, but also the central subject of my research, is a passage from Plato's The Symposium (201d-204c), containing an emblematic, though ambiguous, description of a philosophical journey. The key problems that this description poses, particularly in the area of its metaphilosophical consequences, certainly deserve a more profound reflection. Therefore, in the subsequent sections of the article, I present-and critically discuss-some of the most significant interpretations of Plato's passage, emphasizing their (meta) philosophical implications. The latter, in turn, are organized according to the categories of the modes of philosophy, as proposed by Sextus Empiricus (Pyr., I, 1-4). On the basis of the proposed reflection upon the topography of the philosophical path and upon the character of the generally accepted model of knowledge, I endeavor to provide an explanation that, while avoiding the reefs of dogmatic consequences of thinking about philosophy, would account forand acknowledge-the uncertainty inscribed in philosophy, both with respect to particular resolutions and with respect to the possibility of its own self-fulfillment. For this purpose, other narratives of paths, journeying, and pursuits-metaphorically unlike those offered by Plato, prove useful.
CEL NAUKOWY: Celem badań będzie ogólne skonfrontowanie ze sobą dwóch modeli zetetycznych w obszar... more CEL NAUKOWY: Celem badań będzie ogólne skonfrontowanie ze sobą dwóch modeli zetetycznych w obszarze filozofii polityki. Interesować mnie będą poglądy Erica Voegelina i Leo Straussa i ich nawiązania do filozofii greckiej. W efekcie tych dociekań ukazane zostaną nie tylko możliwości wieloaspektowego rozumienia filozofii polityki w antydogmatycznym duchu zetetycznym, lecz także różnice w modelach zetetycznych na bazie refleksji z zakresu filozofii polityki. PROBLEM I METODY BADAWCZE: Artykuł zawiera rozważania meta‑ filozoficzne odnoszące się do obszaru filozofii polityki. Wykorzystane zostaną przede wszystkim metody filozoficzne stosowane na metapoziomie w stosunku do dociekań z zakresu filozofii polityki. PROCES WYWODU: Najpierw postaram się dookreślić frazę „model zetetyczny” na podstawie fragmentów dzieł Platona, Arystotelesa i Sekstusa Empiryka. W dalszej części wywodu przedstawię model zetetyczny Voegelina, opierając się na jego dziele Order and History oraz Straussa – Restatemen...
There is a broadly shared belief among historians according to which the ideas of Xenophanes of C... more There is a broadly shared belief among historians according to which the ideas of Xenophanes of Colophon (and especially fragment B18 in Diels-Kranz) should be understood as the earliest expression of the idea of progress, a belief in possibility of discovering possibilities of betterment. On the other hand, Hesiod’s story of five generations is usually recognized as a model example of quite the opposite thesis, stressing regress, the fall of humanity. This contradiction is highlighted by the fact that Xenophanes criticises the views on gods from Homer’s and Hesiod’s writings. In this paper I analyse Works and Days by Hesiod as well as remaining fragments of Xenophon’s writings. It seems that Hesiod is first of all interested in diagnosis of the sources of human misery and suffering, and not in describing some historical process of degradation of man. Contrary to this, Xenophanes develops a philosophical framework mostly consisting of epistemological reflection that calls for rejection of the hubris of reason which coincides with hasty and dogmatic judgement of both gods and the world itself. The two thinkers agree that the human fortune, however dependent on gods-established necessity, lays to a degree in man’s own hands thanks to humbleness, piety and wisdom. Thus, their standpoints are not contradictory in historical-philosophical perspective, quite the opposite, they agree in belief in progress, in betterment. Dariusz Kubok: Fortschritt, Hochmut, Demut: Xenophanes von Kolophon contra Hesiod Schlüsselwörter: Fortschritt, Hochmut, Demut, Weisheit, Kritizismus Zusammenfassung: Unter den Philosophiehistorikern herrscht eine allgemein gültige Meinung, dass die Ansichten des Xenophanes von Kolophon (besonders das Fragment B 18 der Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Diels-Kranz) als der früheste Ausdruck des Fortschrittsgedankens und des Glaubens darin, das Bessere entdecken zu können, betrachtet werden sollten. Andererseits aber werden Hesiods Geschichten von Menschengeschlechtern meistens für ein Modellbeispiel der entgegengesetzten These gehalten, die eine gewisse Regression oder einen Untergang der Menschheit voraussetzt. Der Gegensatz wird auch dadurch beeinflusst, dass Xenophanes in seinen 230 Antropologia, etyka Fragmenten die von Homer und Hesiod in deren Werken enthaltenen Götterbilder kritisiert. Im vorliegenden Artikel analysiert der Verfasser die Werke und Tage von Hesiod und die erhalten gebliebenen Fragmente von Xenophanes. Es scheint, dass Hesiod vor allem dafür Interesse hat, die Ursachen des menschlichen Unglücks und Leidens zu erkennen und nicht den historischen Prozess seines unvermeidlichen Untergangs zu schildern. Xenophanes dagegen fordert in seinen erkenntnistheoretischen Gedanken auf, die Hochmut der Vernunft zu zügeln und mit unüberlegten und dogmatischen Urteilen über Götter und Welt aufzuhören. Historiosophisch gesehen sind die Meinungen von den Beiden nicht widersprüchlich, im Gegenteil sie stimmen miteinander in Bezug auf den Fortschrittsglauben über.
The article analyzes extant fragments of Xenophanes of Colophon's works from the perspect... more The article analyzes extant fragments of Xenophanes of Colophon's works from the perspective of broadly-understood criticism, with special emphasis on fragment B34 (Diels-Kranz). Two types of criticism can be distinguished: allocriticism and autocriticism. The first refers to criticism of the opinions of others, while the second type of criticism is directed at one's own opinions. The object of criticism discussed in the article is the possibility of possessing knowledge. In this context, it is worth considering whether Xenophanes believed that no human being, including himself, could possess clear and certain knowledge (a combination of allocriticism and autocriticism), or whether he believed himself excluded from this general rule (solely allocriticism).
CEL NAUKOWY: Celem badań będzie przemyślenie na nowo relacji pomiędzy filozofią polityki a prakty... more CEL NAUKOWY: Celem badań będzie przemyślenie na nowo relacji pomiędzy filozofią polityki a praktyką polityczną. Jako przesłanki w tych analizach zostaną wykorzystane poglądy Michaela Oakeshotta, Costicy Bradatana i Sokratesa. Można spróbować wskazać nowe kryterium odróżnienia tych dwóch obszarów, odwołując się częściowo do tradycji sceptycznej, akcentującej niedopowiedzenie i nieskrępowanie. PROBLEM i METODY BADAWCZE: Artykuł zawiera rozważania metafilozoficzne odnoszące się do obszaru filozofii polityki. Wykorzystane zostaną przede wszystkim metody filozoficzne stosowane na metapoziomie w stosunku do dociekań z zakresu filozofii polityki. PROCES WYWODU: Najpierw postaram się dookreślić frazę „filozofia polityki” i „filozofia polityczna”. W dalszej części wywodu przedstawię poglądy Oakeshotta i Bradatana dotyczące filozofii i polityki. Finalnie skontrastuję te ustalenia z wizerunkiem Sokratesa i ukażę pola synergii. WYNIKI ANALIZY NAUKOWEJ: Analizy z zakresu metafilozofii, w odniesi...
Recenzja książki Matuša Porubjaka Vôl’a (k) celku Človek a spoločenstvo rečou Homéra a Theognida ... more Recenzja książki Matuša Porubjaka Vôl’a (k) celku Človek a spoločenstvo rečou Homéra a Theognida Pusté Úlany: Schola Pholosophica, 2010
The present article attempts to shed light on the sources of philosophical criticism of early Gre... more The present article attempts to shed light on the sources of philosophical criticism of early Greece and on the origins of the critical attitude adopted by the thinkers of the period. Above all, however, reflections presented hereby are meant to serve as a backdrop for analyses of a much broader scope. The study seeks to identify the defining characteristics of early Greek criticism, upon which basis the author puts forth a proposition for a general typology of its forms. Complementing the present comments is a brief discussion of the suggested types of philosophical criticism in light of the views of some of the leading philosophers of the time
Człowiek jest zmuszony uświęcać czas, zaburzać jego monotonną harmonię, wytyczać przełomy i wskaz... more Człowiek jest zmuszony uświęcać czas, zaburzać jego monotonną harmonię, wytyczać przełomy i wskazywać zakola tej wiecznej rzeki. Musi to czynić, aby porównywać, musi rozszczepiać, aby połączyć, musi wreszcie zapaść się w noc, aby powtórnie ujrzeć dzień; musi także rozpoznawać odróżnione strony, obracać w palcach monetę dziejów, aby ujrzeć ich awers i rewers. Jak wygląda filozofia po tej i tamtej stronie wieku? To miejsce w czasie, w którym jesteśmy, stanowi pretekst do namysłu nad stanem filozofii. Na czym jednak ten namysł ma polegać? Wydaje się, że należy wsłuchać się w głos Eurypidesa i popłynąć tam, gdzie wszystkie rzeki — ku źródłom. Rozstrzygającą kwestią w namyśle nad stanem filozofii jest diagnoza greckiej ontologii, która stanowi właśnie owo źródło wszelkich późniejszych systemów filozoficznych, bez względu na to, czy ich twórcy świadomie się do tego przyznają, czy też skrzętnie to ukrywają. Kluczową zaś postacią i inicjatorem greckiej ontologii jest Parmenides z Elei
W czasach, w których głosi się „śmierć” filozofii, pytaniem nie pozbawionym sensu, a ponadto zawi... more W czasach, w których głosi się „śmierć” filozofii, pytaniem nie pozbawionym sensu, a ponadto zawierającym odrobinę koniecznej przekory pozostaje wciąż pytanie o początek filozofii. Ten zwrot w stronę myśli greckiej, poza podkreśleniem jej niepodważalnej doniosłości, ma również na celu wydobywanie fundamentalnych idei, które choć przytłumione w swojej jawności, stanowią niezbywalne podłoże filozofii jako takiej..
The aim of my paper is to indicate the Greek antecedents of select conceptions in the field of mo... more The aim of my paper is to indicate the Greek antecedents of select conceptions in the field of modern political philosophy and to reveal the durability of certain interpretations of Greek skepticism and fallibilism in fields other than traditionally-understood ancient epistemology. My reflections concentrate on the views of M. Oakeshott and K.R. Popper and are based above all on their correspondence from 1948. I attempt to show the similarities and differences in these views from the perspective of anti-dogmatic criticism, whose roots are located in Greek thought. In this sense, the philosophy of politics will be treated as a sort of adaptational test of the life-span of ancient ideas, in this case – to particular versions of skepticism and fallibilism. In this context, special attention should be paid to problems connected with man’s cognitive limitations; the way rationalism is understood; the critique of Utopianism; and the role of tradition and humility in human life.
The following article constitutes an introduction to the problem of critical thinking and philoso... more The following article constitutes an introduction to the problem of critical thinking and philosophical criticism. Above all, the main problem areas and ways of grasping these problems will be outlined. The possible relations between criticism and philosophy will be subject to analysis, enabling a better grasp of the specificity of philosophical criticism. Three basic models of these relations will be distinguished: (1) the identity of criticism and philosophy, (2) the subordinance of criticism to philosophy, and (3) the superordinance of criticism to philosophy. In addition, the main forms of criticism will be discussed, namely: separative criticism, antidogmatic criticism, and epistemological criticism. The goal of these reflections is to clarify the essence of both critical thinking and philosophical criticism.
Analyses of the present dynamics of change in Europe are not complete without taking into account... more Analyses of the present dynamics of change in Europe are not complete without taking into account the role and function of the critical approach as a founding element of European culture. An appreciation of critical thinking must go hand-in-hand with refl ection on its essence, forms, and centuries-long tradition. The chapters of this book contain both historical-philosophical and problem-oriented analyses, indicating the relationships between philosophical criticism and rationalism, logic, scepticism, atheism, dialectic procedure, and philosophical counseling, among others. The book should interest not only humanities scholars, but also scholars in other fi elds, as the development of an anti-dogmatic critical approach is a lasting and indispensible challenge for all disciplines.
Er(r)go Teoria - Literatura - Kultura, 43(2), 2021
The purpose of the considerations presented in this article is to analyze the status of philosoph... more The purpose of the considerations presented in this article is to analyze the status of philosophy in terms of its problem-solving potential, or, more simply, to trace the possible topographies of a philosophical path. The point of departure, but also the central subject of my research, is a passage from Plato's The Symposium (201d-204c), containing an emblematic, though ambiguous, description of a philosophical journey. The key problems that this description poses, particularly in the area of its metaphilosophical consequences, certainly deserve a more profound reflection. Therefore, in the subsequent sections of the article, I present-and critically discuss-some of the most significant interpretations of Plato's passage, emphasizing their (meta) philosophical implications. The latter, in turn, are organized according to the categories of the modes of philosophy, as proposed by Sextus Empiricus (Pyr., I, 1-4). On the basis of the proposed reflection upon the topography of the philosophical path and upon the character of the generally accepted model of knowledge, I endeavor to provide an explanation that, while avoiding the reefs of dogmatic consequences of thinking about philosophy, would account forand acknowledge-the uncertainty inscribed in philosophy, both with respect to particular resolutions and with respect to the possibility of its own self-fulfillment. For this purpose, other narratives of paths, journeying, and pursuits-metaphorically unlike those offered by Plato, prove useful.
CEL NAUKOWY: Celem badań będzie ogólne skonfrontowanie ze sobą dwóch modeli zetetycznych w obszar... more CEL NAUKOWY: Celem badań będzie ogólne skonfrontowanie ze sobą dwóch modeli zetetycznych w obszarze filozofii polityki. Interesować mnie będą poglądy Erica Voegelina i Leo Straussa i ich nawiązania do filozofii greckiej. W efekcie tych dociekań ukazane zostaną nie tylko możliwości wieloaspektowego rozumienia filozofii polityki w antydogmatycznym duchu zetetycznym, lecz także różnice w modelach zetetycznych na bazie refleksji z zakresu filozofii polityki. PROBLEM I METODY BADAWCZE: Artykuł zawiera rozważania meta‑ filozoficzne odnoszące się do obszaru filozofii polityki. Wykorzystane zostaną przede wszystkim metody filozoficzne stosowane na metapoziomie w stosunku do dociekań z zakresu filozofii polityki. PROCES WYWODU: Najpierw postaram się dookreślić frazę „model zetetyczny” na podstawie fragmentów dzieł Platona, Arystotelesa i Sekstusa Empiryka. W dalszej części wywodu przedstawię model zetetyczny Voegelina, opierając się na jego dziele Order and History oraz Straussa – Restatemen...
There is a broadly shared belief among historians according to which the ideas of Xenophanes of C... more There is a broadly shared belief among historians according to which the ideas of Xenophanes of Colophon (and especially fragment B18 in Diels-Kranz) should be understood as the earliest expression of the idea of progress, a belief in possibility of discovering possibilities of betterment. On the other hand, Hesiod’s story of five generations is usually recognized as a model example of quite the opposite thesis, stressing regress, the fall of humanity. This contradiction is highlighted by the fact that Xenophanes criticises the views on gods from Homer’s and Hesiod’s writings. In this paper I analyse Works and Days by Hesiod as well as remaining fragments of Xenophon’s writings. It seems that Hesiod is first of all interested in diagnosis of the sources of human misery and suffering, and not in describing some historical process of degradation of man. Contrary to this, Xenophanes develops a philosophical framework mostly consisting of epistemological reflection that calls for rejection of the hubris of reason which coincides with hasty and dogmatic judgement of both gods and the world itself. The two thinkers agree that the human fortune, however dependent on gods-established necessity, lays to a degree in man’s own hands thanks to humbleness, piety and wisdom. Thus, their standpoints are not contradictory in historical-philosophical perspective, quite the opposite, they agree in belief in progress, in betterment. Dariusz Kubok: Fortschritt, Hochmut, Demut: Xenophanes von Kolophon contra Hesiod Schlüsselwörter: Fortschritt, Hochmut, Demut, Weisheit, Kritizismus Zusammenfassung: Unter den Philosophiehistorikern herrscht eine allgemein gültige Meinung, dass die Ansichten des Xenophanes von Kolophon (besonders das Fragment B 18 der Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Diels-Kranz) als der früheste Ausdruck des Fortschrittsgedankens und des Glaubens darin, das Bessere entdecken zu können, betrachtet werden sollten. Andererseits aber werden Hesiods Geschichten von Menschengeschlechtern meistens für ein Modellbeispiel der entgegengesetzten These gehalten, die eine gewisse Regression oder einen Untergang der Menschheit voraussetzt. Der Gegensatz wird auch dadurch beeinflusst, dass Xenophanes in seinen 230 Antropologia, etyka Fragmenten die von Homer und Hesiod in deren Werken enthaltenen Götterbilder kritisiert. Im vorliegenden Artikel analysiert der Verfasser die Werke und Tage von Hesiod und die erhalten gebliebenen Fragmente von Xenophanes. Es scheint, dass Hesiod vor allem dafür Interesse hat, die Ursachen des menschlichen Unglücks und Leidens zu erkennen und nicht den historischen Prozess seines unvermeidlichen Untergangs zu schildern. Xenophanes dagegen fordert in seinen erkenntnistheoretischen Gedanken auf, die Hochmut der Vernunft zu zügeln und mit unüberlegten und dogmatischen Urteilen über Götter und Welt aufzuhören. Historiosophisch gesehen sind die Meinungen von den Beiden nicht widersprüchlich, im Gegenteil sie stimmen miteinander in Bezug auf den Fortschrittsglauben über.
The article analyzes extant fragments of Xenophanes of Colophon's works from the perspect... more The article analyzes extant fragments of Xenophanes of Colophon's works from the perspective of broadly-understood criticism, with special emphasis on fragment B34 (Diels-Kranz). Two types of criticism can be distinguished: allocriticism and autocriticism. The first refers to criticism of the opinions of others, while the second type of criticism is directed at one's own opinions. The object of criticism discussed in the article is the possibility of possessing knowledge. In this context, it is worth considering whether Xenophanes believed that no human being, including himself, could possess clear and certain knowledge (a combination of allocriticism and autocriticism), or whether he believed himself excluded from this general rule (solely allocriticism).
Krytycyzm, sceptycyzm i zetetycyzm we wczesnej filozofii greckiej, 2021
Dariusz Kubok
Criticism, Skepticism and Zeteticism in Early Greek Philosophy
Summary
The purpos... more Dariusz Kubok Criticism, Skepticism and Zeteticism in Early Greek Philosophy Summary
The purpose of this monograph is to identify and trace the intellectual roots of critical (especially skeptical and zetetic) attitudes manifest in early Greek philosophy. Its point of departure is the definition the meanings of each of the key concepts reflected in the title to avoid terminological confusion. Because my analyses concentrate on philosophical rather than philological or historical substance, I move directly to the study proper. I open my reflections with a general insight into early Greek philosophy, which offers the reader a prelude to a much more focused exploration of the area in search of manifestations of criticism, skepticism, and zeteticism in it. In the process, I emphasize the non-accidental character of the recurrent themes in which these three categories surface in the surviving fragments of the work of early Greek philosophers. Thus, I frame early Greek thought itself in the spirit of criticism, of which the skeptical and zetetic stances are important manifestations. The argument of this book, providing a broad critical perspective conducive to a reading of early Greek philosophy based on considerations of historical character, but also of philosophical nature, demonstrates that the issue of criticism is closely connected with epistemological and meta-philosophical questions, which I indicate as central to the origins of philosophy as we know it. Such a perspective can be seen as a complement to the well-known and well-established cognitive approaches that have appeared in the history of ancient philosophy. The first part of the book offers a philosophical definition of criticism, skepticism, and zeteticism as general attitudes informing the scholarly discourse. This section of the dissertation opens with considerations upon the meaning of the verb κρίνω and the adjective κριτικός. These reflections allow the reader to arrive at the understanding of critical attitude as attitude that is source-oriented (referring to the function of these terms and their derivations in early Greek literature), philosophical (i.e. closely related to philosophical problems), and generally valid. To demonstrate the latter, I analyze the thematization of the issue of criticism in the extant fragments of the works of early Greek philosophers, indicating that philosophy itself should be understood as an essential critical activity at the fundament of all early Greek thought. With regard to skepticism and zeteticism I rely on Sextus Empiricus’s definitions provided in his Outlines of Scepticism, complementing his insights with my exploration of a wide range of meanings of the verbs σκέπτομαι and ζητέω as well as the adjectives σκεπτικός and ζητητικός. In particular, I attempt to demonstrate that although “skepticism” is an ambiguous term, the return to the term’s etymology is productive for the sake of the analyses of philosophical skepticism in early Greek thought. The clear discrepancy between the interpretations of skepticism in Pyr., I, 1–4 and Pyr., I, 7 combined with Sextus’s detailed characterization of skepticism allow me to distinguish two dimensions of skepticism evident in his texts: zetetic and ephectic. Part two of the monograph offers a detailed analysis of the fragments and doxography associated with the earliest forms of Greek philosophy in the light of the forms of criticism distinguished in part one. The analysis focuses upon the earliest manifestations of separative criticism, anti-dogmatic criticism, and epistemological criticism, as well as on philosophical personal criticism in its two main varieties: allocriticism and autocriticism. The considerations offered in part two close with an attempt to categorize the critical tradition of the antiquity through the prism of the idea of syncriticism. I distinguish two types of syncriticism: 1) syncriticism based on connection or combination, i.e., conjunctive syncriticism, and 2) syncriticism based on comparison or juxtaposition, i.e., comparative syncriticism, which in itself occurs in two varieties: ameinosyncriticism and isosyncriticism. These distinctions allow one to carry out a more nuanced analysis of early Greek philosophy, making it possible, for example, to discriminate between skepticism as zeteticism and skepticism as ephecticism, to separate skepticism from negative dogmatism, as well as to establish the fallibilist interpretation of objects of reflection as a separate concept. The analyses presented in part two allow one to argue that early Greek philosophy evolved into various forms of criticism, including fallibilism based on zeteticism, doxastic uncertain knowledge, and ameinosyncriticism as epistemic inegalitarianism. The driving force of this project was my desire to (at least partially) uncover the source structures, or even fundamental schemes, of critical thinking. With such a goal in mind, one can argue that the monograph has succeeded in showing that at the deepest level of our contact with the external world we employ schemes of separative criticism understood as our capacity to identify objects of observation and reflection and to differentiate them. This capacity enables us to engage in other critical activities, such as those identified as judgmental criticism, ordering criticism, volitional criticism, and interpretive criticism, and, above all, in anti-dogmatic criticism, epistemological criticism, auto- and allocriticism, and syncriticism, which this work explores in detail. Moreover, the argument presented in the text illuminates this heretofore unveiled “critical logic” in aspects that have not been taken into account in the philosophical literature thus far, allowing one to conclude that despite the fact that (at least some of) our critical capacities seem deeply rooted in our tradition of thought, they certainly need to be constantly fueled and expanded. The analyses presented in the text leave no doubt that a profound study of the Greek sources of critical reflection may significantly contribute to a better understanding of the current state of our critical insight, especially that—contrary to the popular opinion—it is not necessarily the case that historical progress must go hand in hand with the progressive deepening (or broadening) of the human capacity for critical thinking. This book demonstrates that criticism which emerged at birth of Western philosophical thought was an important determinant of its further development. The findings derived from the analyses presented in the texts allow one to conclude that it stands to reason to argue that it is possible to overcome the present-day lack of criticism in various areas human activity both by means of a critical return to the beginnings of philosophy and by means of the expansion of individual and collective critical self-awareness. Thus, as has often been the case in history, a step back may in fact be an important step forward. Keywords: criticism, skepticism, zeteticism, Pre-Socratics, Greek philosophy, epistemology, methodology, fallibilism, knowledge, critical thinking
Analyses of the present dynamics of change in Europe are not complete without taking into account... more Analyses of the present dynamics of change in Europe are not complete without taking into account the role and function of the critical approach as a founding element of European culture. An appreciation of critical thinking must go hand-in-hand with refl ection on its essence, forms, and centuries-long tradition. The chapters of this book contain both historical-philosophical and problem-oriented analyses, indicating the relationships between philosophical criticism and rationalism, logic, scepticism, atheism, dialectic procedure, and philosophical counseling, among others. The book should interest not only humanities scholars, but also scholars in other fi elds, as the development of an anti-dogmatic critical approach is a lasting and indispensible challenge for all disciplines.
EPISTEMOLOGY WITHIN A THEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK - (S.) Tor Mortal and Divine in Early Greek Epistemol... more EPISTEMOLOGY WITHIN A THEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK - (S.) Tor Mortal and Divine in Early Greek Epistemology. A Study of Hesiod, Xenophanes and Parmenides. Pp. xiv + 406. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. Cased, £90, US$120. ISBN: 978-1-107-02816-6.
The article presents selected aspects of Xenophanes' philosophy (especially B 34 and B 18 Diels-K... more The article presents selected aspects of Xenophanes' philosophy (especially B 34 and B 18 Diels-Kranz) in the light of Homer's thought. First of all, skepticism should be distinguished from negative dogmatism. I will therefore use the term "skepticism" (from Greek skeptomai-explore, examine, consider, think) in accordance with Sextus Empiricus' typology. In his Outlines of Pyrrhonism (I, 1-2) he distinguishes three forms of philosophy: (1) dogmatic (dogmatike), characteristic of those, who claim to have found the truth; (2) academic (akademaike), defined as negative dogmatism denying the possibility of finding the truth; (3) skeptic (skeptike), which involve a persistent search for truth. The main aim of the paper is to compare Homer's attitudes with those of Xenophanes as far as the distinction between skepticism and negative dogmatism is concerned. Cieľom článku je preskúmať fragmenty spisov Homéra a Xenofana, ktoré obsahujú vý-povede so skeptickým charakterom. Vychádzame z rozlíšenia troch typov filozofie, ktoré sformuloval Sextus Empeirikus: dogmatickej, akademickej a skeptickej filozofie. Filozo-fiu akademickú možno vymedziť ako negatívny dogmatizmus, pretože kategoricky (do-gmaticky) predpokladá nemožnosť (od toho jej negatívny charakter) vedenia. Preto mož-no v najvšeobecnejšej rovine dogmatizmus (pozitívny aj negatívny) a skepticizmus posta-viť proti sebe. Vďaka tomuto postupu bude možné uskutočniť hlbšiu analýzu fragmentov vy-jadrujúcich široko chápaný skeptický postoj a tiež porovnať Homérove názory s názormi Xenofanovými. Diogenés Laertios pri opise Pyrrhónových názorov píše, že za pôvodcu skeptického smeru niektorí považujú Homéra, pretože vraj o rôznych veciach hovoril odlišne, o žiadnej otázke nevypovedal dogmaticky (DL, IX, 71). Diogenés ďalej vymenúva iných myslite-ľov, u ktorých sa už pred Pyrrhónom objavili črty skeptického myslenia (Archiloches, Euripidés, popri Zenónovi z Eley, Démokritovi a Platónovi uvádza aj Xenofana a cituje časť zlomku B 34 (DK, 21 B 34, 1-2), konkrétne prvý verš a začiatok verša druhého, ktoré hlásajú, že jasnú (zreteľnú) pravdu žiaden človek nepoznal ani ju poznať nebude: "καὶ τὸ μὲν οὖν σαφὲς οὔτις ἀνὴρ ἴδεν οὐδέ τις ἔσται εἰδώς..." FILOZOFIA Roč. 69, 2014, č. 3
Uploads
Papers
Criticism, Skepticism and Zeteticism in Early Greek Philosophy
Summary
The purpose of this monograph is to identify and trace the intellectual roots of critical (especially skeptical and zetetic) attitudes manifest in early Greek philosophy. Its point of departure is the definition the meanings of each of the key concepts reflected in the title to avoid terminological confusion. Because my analyses concentrate on philosophical rather than philological or historical substance, I move directly to the study proper. I open my reflections with a general insight into early Greek philosophy, which offers the reader a prelude to a much more focused exploration of the area in search of manifestations of criticism, skepticism, and zeteticism in it. In the process, I emphasize the non-accidental character of the recurrent themes in which these three categories surface in the surviving fragments of the work of early Greek philosophers. Thus, I frame early Greek thought itself in the spirit of criticism, of which the skeptical and zetetic stances are important manifestations.
The argument of this book, providing a broad critical perspective conducive to a reading of early Greek philosophy based on considerations of historical character, but also of philosophical nature, demonstrates that the issue of criticism is closely connected with epistemological and meta-philosophical questions, which I indicate as central to the origins of philosophy as we know it. Such a perspective can be seen as a complement to the well-known and well-established cognitive approaches that have appeared in the history of ancient philosophy.
The first part of the book offers a philosophical definition of criticism, skepticism, and zeteticism as general attitudes informing the scholarly discourse. This section of the dissertation opens with considerations upon the meaning of the verb κρίνω and the adjective κριτικός. These reflections allow the reader to arrive at the understanding of critical attitude as attitude that is source-oriented (referring to the function of these terms and their derivations in early Greek literature), philosophical (i.e. closely related to philosophical problems), and generally valid. To demonstrate the latter, I analyze the thematization of the issue of criticism in the extant fragments of the works of early Greek philosophers, indicating that philosophy itself should be understood as an essential critical activity at the fundament of all early Greek thought. With regard to skepticism and zeteticism I rely on Sextus Empiricus’s definitions provided in his Outlines of Scepticism, complementing his insights with my exploration of a wide range of meanings of the verbs σκέπτομαι and ζητέω as well as the adjectives σκεπτικός and ζητητικός. In particular, I attempt to demonstrate that although “skepticism” is an ambiguous term, the return to the term’s etymology is productive for the sake of the analyses of philosophical skepticism in early Greek thought. The clear discrepancy between the interpretations of skepticism in Pyr., I, 1–4 and Pyr., I, 7 combined with Sextus’s detailed characterization of skepticism allow me to distinguish two dimensions of skepticism evident in his texts: zetetic and ephectic.
Part two of the monograph offers a detailed analysis of the fragments and doxography associated with the earliest forms of Greek philosophy in the light of the forms of criticism distinguished in part one. The analysis focuses upon the earliest manifestations of separative criticism, anti-dogmatic criticism, and epistemological criticism, as well as on philosophical personal criticism in its two main varieties: allocriticism and autocriticism. The considerations offered in part two close with an attempt to categorize the critical tradition of the antiquity through the prism of the idea of syncriticism. I distinguish two types of syncriticism: 1) syncriticism based on connection or combination, i.e., conjunctive syncriticism, and 2) syncriticism based on comparison or juxtaposition, i.e., comparative syncriticism, which in itself occurs in two varieties: ameinosyncriticism and isosyncriticism. These distinctions allow one to carry out a more nuanced analysis of early Greek philosophy, making it possible, for example, to discriminate between skepticism as zeteticism and skepticism as ephecticism, to separate skepticism from negative dogmatism, as well as to establish the fallibilist interpretation of objects of reflection as a separate concept. The analyses presented in part two allow one to argue that early Greek philosophy evolved into various forms of criticism, including fallibilism based on zeteticism, doxastic uncertain knowledge, and ameinosyncriticism as epistemic inegalitarianism.
The driving force of this project was my desire to (at least partially) uncover the source structures, or even fundamental schemes, of critical thinking. With such a goal in mind, one can argue that the monograph has succeeded in showing that at the deepest level of our contact with the external world we employ schemes of separative criticism understood as our capacity to identify objects of observation and reflection and to differentiate them. This capacity enables us to engage in other critical activities, such as those identified as judgmental criticism, ordering criticism, volitional criticism, and interpretive criticism, and, above all, in anti-dogmatic criticism, epistemological criticism, auto- and allocriticism, and syncriticism, which this work explores in detail. Moreover, the argument presented in the text illuminates this heretofore unveiled “critical logic” in aspects that have not been taken into account in the philosophical literature thus far, allowing one to conclude that despite the fact that (at least some of) our critical capacities seem deeply rooted in our tradition of thought, they certainly need to be constantly fueled and expanded.
The analyses presented in the text leave no doubt that a profound study of the Greek sources of critical reflection may significantly contribute to a better understanding of the current state of our critical insight, especially that—contrary to the popular opinion—it is not necessarily the case that historical progress must go hand in hand with the progressive deepening (or broadening) of the human capacity for critical thinking. This book demonstrates that criticism which emerged at birth of Western philosophical thought was an important determinant of its further development. The findings derived from the analyses presented in the texts allow one to conclude that it stands to reason to argue that it is possible to overcome the present-day lack of criticism in various areas human activity both by means of a critical return to the beginnings of philosophy and by means of the expansion of individual and collective critical self-awareness. Thus, as has often been the case in history, a step back may in fact be an important step forward.
Keywords: criticism, skepticism, zeteticism, Pre-Socratics, Greek philosophy, epistemology, methodology, fallibilism, knowledge, critical thinking