SPECIAL COMMUNICATES
R y s z a r d W i ś n i e w s k i
8
THPOLISH PHILOSOPHICAL CONVENTION
Th e history of Polish philosophical conventions is characterised by irregularity1.
Th e First Polish Philosophical Convention took place in Lvov in 1923, two follow-ing ones in 1927 in Warsaw and in 1936 in Cracow, addfollow-ing numbers, they shared its prior name of Polish Philosophical Convention [Polski Zjazd Filozofi czny]. Th e General Committee of Polish Philosophical Conventions was then supervising the implementation of the ideas of Polish philosophers congress meetings, which in-cluded the most famous Polish philosophers and was chaired by Kazimierz Twar-dowski.
Aft er the Second World War, the separated Polish philosophers could not meet for a long time for political and ideological reasons. Th ere was no political ap-proval for such meetings. Only in 1977, political authorities risked organising the convention, which was supposed to – as generally understood – confi rm the pri-macy of Marxist philosophy. What is more, the meeting took a little diff erent name of Ogolnopolski Zjazd Filozofi czny, and took place in Lublin, at Maria Curie-Skłodowska University. At the end of the epoch, in 1987, in Cracow, visiting in character at Jagiellonian University, the 5th Convention of Polish Philosophy was organised. Th us, the convention in Lublin was included in the series of Polish philosophical conventions, deciding that irrespective of its programme and or-ganisation schedule, it was a convention of Polish philosophers, one that expressed the natural in the miscellaneous society need to conduct common congress
meet-1 Th e history of the initial fi ve Polish philosophical conventions was described by Ryszard
Jad-czak, Włodzimierz Tyburski, Ryszard Wiśniewski in the volume Polskie zjazdy fi lozofi czne, R. Jadczak (ed.), Toruń 1995.
ings. Th e Cracow convention was most certainly a herald of the approaching change of political conditions for dealing with philosophy in Poland. Eight years later, in 1995, in entirely new system circumstances, the 6th Polish Philosophical Convention was summoned in Toruń, restoring the tradition that was born in the fi rst convention of building a unanimous, repetitive name of the convention. It has been the biggest convention so far, and a clearly pluralist one as far as the structure of philosophical orientations is concerned. Only aft er nine years, in 2004, the 7th Polish Philosophical Convention took place in Szczecin, which referred to the ideas of the convention in Toruń. Soon aft er the convention, it was decided that the next, 8th Polish Philo-sophical Convention would take place four years later in Warsaw.
While the organisation of the initial three conventions was supervised by the independent General Committee of Polish Philosophical Conventions, the one in Lublin was already an initiative of the Committee on Philosophical Sciences of the Polish Academy of Sciences, which also supervised generally the preparations to the convention. Th e 5th convention fallowed the same pattern. It was from the 6th Polish Philosophical Convention that Polish Philosophical Association became, next to the Committee on Philosophical Sciences of the PAN [ Polish Academy of Sciences], a co-organiser of later Polish philosophical conventions. Th e 8th Polish Philosophical Convention took place in Warsaw from 15th to 20th September 2008. About 700 philosophers from Poland and from abroad took active part in the Convention. Institutional organisers of the Convention were: the Committee on Philosophical Sciences of the Polish Academy of Sciences, the Polish Philo-sophical Association, as well as the University of Warsaw, the Musical University of Frederic Chopin in Warsaw, and the Warsaw School of Social Sciences and Hu-manities. Personally, the work was performed by Prof. Jacek J. Jadacki – the chair-man of Prof. Tadeusz Gadacz, Prof. Władysław Strożewski, and Prof. Tadeusz Szubka. Th e Convention had the patronage of the President of the Republic of Poland, Lech Kaczyński.
Th e formal opening of the Convention was performed at the University of Warsaw, and the plenary sessions, panel discussions and the sessions of 17 sections were located in the rooms of the School of Social Sciences and Humanities. It was there also that the closure and initial conclusions of the Convention took place. Th e concentration of the sessions in one didactic complex and the conditions of the sessions can be described as quite good.
Members of the Convention were accommodated in the Praski Hotel “Feliks”, but also in the neighbouring student dormitories of the University of Warsaw, which, unfortunately, were under renovation (as planned) and this fact lowered the generally good organisational-social level of the Convention.
Th e motto of the Convention was a thought of Witelon, a thirteen century Polish philosopher:
“Nothing is perceived in its proper size”. Th e sentence excellently fi tted into the programme and the intellectual atmosphere of the sessions. Th e programme of the Convention was comprised of morning plenary speeches, pre-aft ernoon and af-ternoon sessions in sections and sub-sections, as well as of evening discussions of the round table2. A day of sessions usually fi nished with a musical concert, in which
also philosophers – pianists revealed their excellence in music: Prof. Karol Tar-nowski and Dr Anna Brożek.
Th e fi rst plenary lecture, on the day of the beginning of the Convention, was incorporated into the formal aft ernoon inauguration. Th e lecture was read by Rev. Prof. Michał Heller, and its title was strictly relevant to the aforementioned motto of the Convention: Th e Limits of Time, Space and Probability. Aft er the formal
in-auguration, to which all chairmen of the organisational committees of philosoph-ical conventions aft er the war had been invited, a grand concert at the Musphilosoph-ical University was performed. Th e remaining plenary lectures on the following days of the Convention were given by Prof. Tadeusz Gadacz, Th e Truth in Modern Phi-losophy, Prof. Władysław Strożewski, From the Value of Being to the Being of Value,
J. Hołowka, Cognitive Constructions, Prof. Jan Woleński, Argumentation and
Per-suasion in Philosophy.
Th e substantial character of the Convention issues is specifi ed in the names of the sections: 1) Logic, 2) Semiotics and Language Philosophy, 3) Methodology and Science Philosophy (consecutive sessions of which were devoted to the methods of logic and mathematics, the relation between epistemology and science, meth-odology of social and humanistic sciences, and disciplinary and methodological problems of detailed sciences) with a Sub-section of Metaphilosophy, 4) Ontology and Metaphysics, 5) Nature Philosophy (distinguishing the paths: general philoso-phy, physical-cosmological, biological-nature study), 6) Epistemology and Reason Philosophy (in which, in both the title paths, individual sessions were devoted to and entitled: Realism – antirealism, Knowledge, Norms and cognitive values, Me-taepistemology, Skepticism, Certainty and hidden knowledge, Intuition and wis-dom, Reduction and nauralisation, Other minds and externalism, Embodiment and thought experiments, Imagination and calculating concepts of mind), 7) Phil-osophical Anthropology, 8) Society and Politics Philosophy (containing an
exten-2 Th e organisers issued Th e Programme of the 8th Polish Philosophical Convention and
sum-maries of the speeches. Comp. VIII Polski Zjazd Filozofi czny. Księga streszczeń, A. Brożek, J.J. Jadacki, Warszawa 2008, p. 656.
sive list of speeches divided into two untitled paths), 9) Philosophy and Culture (individual sessions of which were entitled: Between immanence and transcend-ence, Culture philosophy and axiology, Culture philosophy and a dialogue, culture philosophy, language and media), 10) Philosophy and Religion, 11) Ethics, 11a) Business Ethics, 12) Aesthetics, 13) History of Polish Philosophy, 14) Ancient His-tory and the Middle Ages Foreign Philosophy, 13a) Th e Far East Philosophy His-tory, 15) Modern History and the Newest Foreign Philosophy, 15a) Analytical Philosophy History, 16) Philosophy Didactics, 17) Foreign Guests (in which paths were created for guests from the West and from the East).
It can be noticed that the names of sections, as well as the themes of the paths, sessions and sub-sessions refl ected the structure of the richness of off ers, making it possible to realise what Polish philosophers are dealing with right now. It is clear that three groups of problems emerged. Th e fi rst group were disciplines that study forms, ways and values of cognition of reality; the second group included the issues of human, politics, culture and values philosophy; and the third group was con-cerned with the history of philosophy. Ethics was less widely represented in the second group. Th e ethics of business was constantly present. In this case, contrary to the previous two conventions, the issues of ecological philosophy and ethics were invisible. Axiology was connected to the philosophy of culture.
Discussions of the round table were organised at the Convention to an extent that exceeded the numbers of panels of the previous conventions. Th is form seemed to work perfectly and to express comprehensively the problems that wonder phil-osophical environment. Here is a list of the discussions of the round table in the subject order of consecutive convention evenings: 1) Cultural conditioning of philosophical terms, 2) Model of philosophical education, 3) Zermelo and the Warsaw School, 4) Ethics of science people and the condition of Polish philosophy, 5) Cognitive values in science, 6) Is naturalisation hope of epistemology, 7) Ethical dilemmas of modern democracy, 8) Th e latest research tendencies in aesthetics, 9) Th e presence of psychoanalysis in culture, 10) Externalism and internalism in epistemology, language philosophy and mind philosophy, 11) Who needs the phi-losophy of law?, 12) Russian questions about Russia as a philosophical problem, 13) Mind philosophy and neuroscience, 14) Science and culture in the need of humanistic philosophy of nature, 15) Traditions and philosophical schools in Polish philosophy. In total, the panel discussions expressed stronger tendencies than ever to specify philosophy and to make it more scientifi c, which was a de-clared programme aim of the Convention.
Th e whole programme of the Convention had a strong conclusion in the form of a panel discussion, considered the key one by the organisers, entitled Modern
Polish Philosophy: Achievements and Failures, Hopes and Th reats, which was pre-sided by Prof. Jacek. J. Jadacki, with the participation of Professors: Adam Grobler, Ryszard Kleszcz, Adam Nowaczyk, Marian Przełęcki (the text of his voice in the discussion was read), Antoni B. Stępień, Władysław Strożewski, Tadeusz Szubka, Andrzej Wiśniewski and Ryszard Wiśniewski. Th e outcome of the discussion was quite positive for the general development of philosophy in Poland and for the hopes that the rapidly developing young philosophers evoke.
Recapitulating the discussions performed during the realisation of all the pro-gramme forms, it must be stated that the subjects and problems tackled by them revealed the advantage of the widely understood analytical orientation in Polish philosophy, as well as, hopefully, the incidental marginalisation of the axiological orientation. Noticeable was a withdrawal from the thrust of postmodernism in culture philosophy. Th e previous two Conventions were witness to a stronger or weaker struggle of classical and modernist philosophy against the postmodern currents, similarly, also the ethical questions could be found in the centre of panel discussions, which were granted the highest esteem. Th is time it was diff erent and by no means, as it might be presumed, due to the programme policy of the organ-isers. It should be assumed that the list of subjects refl ects more the presence of the individual philosophical specialities and points of view in the movement of philo-sophical thought in Poland.
It is diffi cult to present the whole Convention in a comprehensive description and general evaluation. In conclusion to the Convention, Prof. Władysław Strożewski claimed that the Convention turns into history of Polish philosophical conventions, that it approaches in its programme and organisational level the two previous ones, organised in independent Poland. Indeed, despite some apprehen-sions that in the programme of the Convention the analytical attitude to philoso-phy would prevail, one that refers to the tradition of the Lvov – Warsaw School, the organisers were not too restrictive, leaving the programme frames for the initiative of Polish philosophers to fi ll with content. It was this initiative that constituted the basis for the creation of some sub-sections or subject paths, or for designing and conducting discussions of the round table.
It is worth appreciating the presence at the Convention of a few Polish phi-losophers that for years have lived abroad (John Skorupski, Wlodek Rabinowicz, Piotr Bołtuć), as well as of the foreign members of the Convention that were not of Polish origin (Paul Horwitch). Th eir speeches in English were granted consider-able attention. Th e list of subjects of the speeches by the members of the Western path contained abundant presentations that are logical-analytical in character. Guests from the East presented their papers in Polish, Russian or English. Here,
the issues of the speeches were more varied. Th e idea to organise foreign language sessions for guests from abroad is one of the most successful programme ideas of the Convention.
Th e previous two philosophical conventions were bustling with youth. Th e Warsaw Convention can also be called a meeting of young Polish philosophers. Th e aff ordable convention fee, cheap accommodation in dormitories, unfortu-nately distant from a decent standard of students homes, created the conditions for postgraduate students, or even undergraduate students to participate in con-siderable numbers. Th ere were even instances of section speeches based on the content of Master theses, which sometimes evoked doubts. A good project of an off ered speech may not be supported by a mature enough content of the presenta-tion. Th e Convention, as usual, was an opportunity to organise meetings of philo-sophical periodicals editorial staff and meetings of other national groups, as well as to sell philosophical publishings. It was possible to purchase numerous works which have not reached destinations distant from the place of publication.
From my personal point of view, as far as the sessions of the round table are concerned, I would consider the most interesting the discussions entitled: Th e Ethics of Academic People and the Condition of Polish Philosophy and Ethical Dilemmas of Contemporary Democracy. Th e fi rst one, initiated by a speech by Rev. Prof. Andrzej Szostek, focused fi rst on an endeavour to estimate the ethos of Polish philosophy on the background of the ethos of Polish science (no substantial dif-ferences were shown between the state of morality of whole academic society and the morality of Polish philosophers), and later predominantly on the “pains tor-menting Polish philosophers”. At this point, attention was drawn to the need of supporting creative personalities, young talents, to the dangers awaiting the spirit of creative practice of philosophy and in a style characteristic for philosophical schools such as the Lvov – Warsaw, or Lublin ones (it was emphasised that a large number of students and taking a few teaching posts is a problem, as well as the Bologna system, which divides studies into two levels of education, which is det-rimental for dealing with philosophy). A lot of attention. Here, the object of argu-ments was the answer to the question whether reviews should be written only by a narrow circle of specialists, whose specifi c language of sub-discipline is not un-derstandable for the widely understood fi eld. Science should be communicative in the area of the fi eld, i.e. of humanistic sciences. Th e panellists of the discussion were: S. Prof. Barbara Hyrowicz, Prof. Włodzimierz Galewicz, Dr Hab. Paweł Łukow, Prof. Jan Woleński.
Th e discussion concerned with ethical dilemmas of democracy, chaired by Prof. Justyna Miklaszewska, involved Prof. Miłowit Kuniński, Prof. Ryszard Legutko,
Prof. Barbara Markiewicz, Prof. Andrzej Szahaj, and Dr Hab. Magdalena Środa. Its main problematic issue was an evaluation of democracy and how it functions in Poland. First of all, it must be noticed that in various words the panelists expressed treating democracy as a both instrumental and symbolic value with respect to evidential values whose realisation it should serve. Probably the loudest and most determined protest against making the value of democracy absolute was voiced by Prof. Legutko. Prof. Szahaj and Dr Hab. Środa were his opponents, not really with respect to the absolutisation, but as far as protection of values connected with democracy is concerned. Another controversy was caused by the issue of allowing discussion and democratic opinion on values. Magdalena Środa criticised the au-thoritarian evaluations of values on the part of state authority, using the example of the popular with the media discussion concerning chemical castration of pae-dophiles. Other discussions of the round table were characterised by a similar tone, outlining the divisions of standpoints.
In general, Polish philosophy was presented at the Convention in an outstand-ingly substantial manner, as analytical, caring for cognitive values, preciseness of statements, demonstrating a contact with the modern world trends in numerous branches of philosophical research. Using the words used recently in the title of a book by Barbara Skarga, it is possible to sustain her opinion, “We do not have to worry about philosophy”.
To close the Convention, a representation of its organisers and members put fl owers on the graves of Polish philosophers on Powązki Cemeteries, on the grave of Edward Abramowski, Henryk Elzenberg, Tadeusz and Janina Kotarbiński, Stanisław Leśniewski, Maria and Stanisław Ossowski, Rev. Jan Salamucha, and Władysław Tatarkiewicz, having read short fragments of their works.
