The Dialectic of Polish Positivism

Henryk Markiewicz

The Dialectic of Polish Positivism

Literary Studies in Poland 6, 7-28

Articles

H enryk M arkiewicz

The Dialectic o f Polish Positivism

i

The initial stages o f Positivism 's reception in P o lan d are well-

know n. 1 If one om its the early, but fo rgotten publications o f A drian

K rzyżanow ski (1842) an d D om inik Szulc (1851), the m ost significant

co n trib u tio n to the area was F ather Franciszek K rupifiski's paper

Szkoła pozytyw na ( The Positive School), published in “Biblioteka

W arszaw ska” o f 1868. The general level o f know ledge o f the sources

o f Positivism was low, and in 1873 P io tr Chm ielow ski w rote o f the

W arsaw environm ent as follows:

A few were fo u n d (let us say: a b o u t a score) w h o , m o tiv a ted by c o n sc ie n tio u sn e ss, lo o k e d in to the sou rces and read for th em selv es, if n ot C o m te h im self, then Littré, and acquired a m ore or less exact n o tio n o f the m eth o d s an d ov era ll nature o f p o sitiv e sc ie n c e .2

It has not yet been determ ined precisely a t w hat m om ent Polish

progressive form ations accepted “P ositivism ” as a nam e to denote their

aims. As early as 1866 a foo tn ote by the editors o f “ Dziennik

L iteracki” describes K azim ierz C hłędow ski’s pap er Siła u- historii

(Force in H istory) as an expression o f “the positive philosophical

school th at continues to spread th ro u g h o u t the W est.” 3 T hree years

later, L eopold M ikulski, when publishing in Lvov his tran slatio n o f

B uchner's K raft und Stoff\ confessed th a t his aim s w ould be fulfilled

“if this w ork succeeds in raising even a small num ber o f the

1 See B. S k a r g a , N a ro d zin y p o z y ty w iz m u p o lsk ie g o ! 1831 — 1864) I The Birth o f

P olish P o sitiv ism , 1831 — 1864), W arszaw a 1964.

2 IP. C h m ie lo w sk i], P o z y ty w iz m i p o z y ty w iś c i ( P o sitiv ism a n d the P o s itiv ists ), " N iw a ”, 1873, nr 29.

8

m em bers o f Polish society from the dom ains o f dream an d delusion,

and in sum m oning them to the b ann er o f an authentic, positive

p hilosophy.” 4

M eanw hile in W arsaw , “Przegląd T ygodniow y” h ad p ro tested

against K azim ierz K aszew ski’s statem ent th at since the ap p earan ce o f

K ru p ih sk i’s paper an un b ro k en silence h ad prevailed u p o n the subject

o f Positivism :

o n e can see that Mr. R a szew sk i d o es n o t take in to a cco u n t the en tire m o v e m e n t o f w ritings in the spirit o f this sc h o o l that have been ap p earin g o v er the last fo u r y e a r s .5

O nly in 1871, however, is there a build-up o f Positivist d ec la ra­

tions. A t the close o f this year in an intro d u cto ry article entitled

A t the Breaking-Point, A leksander Świętochowski w rote:

W e d o n o t ascribe to o u rse lv es a n y e x cep tio n a l or, a s so m e w o u ld h a v e it, M ick iew iczia n m issio n , th o u g h w e d o n o t d en y that o u r p resent stru ggle h as a certain affinity to the ren ow n ed w ars o f the R o m a n tics. O n e m ay lack gen iu s an d n ev erth eless feel the ex isten ce o f b ack w ard n ess an d prejudice. W e repeat yet a gain that w e d o n o t co m p a re o u rse lv es to the h o ly fa la n g ę led by the great A d a m , but w e share its p r o ­ gressiven ess. T h e d ifference lies in the scenery o f e p o c h s and their c o n d itio n s . M ick iew icz w as a p o et and he b reathed his large p o etic spirit in to the p ro g ress o f form and im a g in a tio n , an d he revitalized literature, w h o se fields so o n teem ed with fruit. In p la ce o f d eath there w a s a ferm ent o f life. W e to o , in the teeth o f o u r m o tio n less torp or, w ish for life, but the p o sitiv e spirit o f the tim es d icta tes th a t we d em and a ctiv ity : n ot so m uch in the w ay o f p o etic creativity as to d irect the d ev elo p m en t o f the so c ia l im a g in a tio n , w h o se lead ersh ip o u g h t to c o m e fro m the p e r io d ic a ls.6

A few weeks later, the editors o f “Przegląd Tygodniow y” ad ded, in

the course o f referring to the u n paid p articip atio n by young au th o rs

(“pupils o f the M ain H igh School, the forefront o f the progressive

intelligentsia”):

P erhaps this d eb u t w ill h elp you to d ecid e m ore ea sily w h eth er w e k o w to w to a n y o n e, w h ether o u r p o sitiv ism is lo n g in the t o o t h —or a real force for li f e .7

4 L. M u l s k i [L. M ik u lsk i], K ilk a słó w o d tłu m a cza i w y d a w c y (A Few W o rd s f r o m

the T ra n sla to r a n d P ublish er), [in:] L. B u c h n e r , S iła i m a teria , L vov 1869, p. V II.

5 [A n o n y m o u s], P rze g lą d p r a s y p e r io d y c zn e j (A R e view o f the P e rio d ic a l P ress), “Przegląd T y g o d n io w y ” , 1869, nr 28.

6 [A. Ś w ięto ch o w sk i], N a w y ło m ie, ibidem , 1871, nr 50. 7 [A n o n y m o u s], Z a k o ń c ze n ie ( C on clu sion ), ib id em , nr 53.

The D ia le c tic o f P olish P o sitivism

9

D uring the next two years, 1872 and 1873, “Positivism ” and its

derivatives ap p ear with grow ing frequency in the colum ns o f the young

press; such o p p o n en ts o f novel ideas as Józef N arzym ski (P ozytyw ni —

The Positive Ones, 1872) and T adeusz Żuliński (N asi pozytyw iści —

Our Positivists, 1872) suddenly begin to em ploy them too. F rom the

very outset the equivocality o f the term , o f which the p ro p o n en ts

o f the new trends were them selves fully aw are, was a source o f m uch

co n tro v e rsy :

S o m e —w rote Ś w ię to c h o w sk i— und erstan d a P o sitiv ist to be a fa ith fu l adherent o f the sc h o o l o f C o m te , o th e rs add his in d ep en dent p u p ils, and still o th e rs ap p ly this term to any and every p h ilo so p h er w h o se m eth o d o f research is fo u n d ed o n the natural scien ces. W ith such a triple stan d ard , m isu n d ersta n d in g s em erge by the m in u te .8

Polish publicists consented to su p p o rt the b ro a d interp retatio n

previously elabo rated by Świętochowski him self:

S in ce P o sitiv ism is far from b ein g the in v en tio n or c o n c e p tio n o f a sin gle man [C om te], since his fun d a m en ta l id eas are the c o m m o n property o f several cen tu ries and entire series o f learned m en ; and, finally, since the m o st recent P o sitiv ist thinkers, so -ca lled , co n tra d ict all the o rig in a l p ro cla m a tio n s o f C o m te , the fo u n d er o f P o sitiv ism —it thus fo llo w s that P o sitiv ism , correctly u n d e r sto o d , is n o t a sc h o o l with an inflexible c o d ex , w ith ch a n g eless a rticles o f faith o r w ith an in fallib le earn estn ess, but a scientific m e th o d fo u n d e d u p o n exp erim en t and the natural scien ces, w hich has b een ap p lied and d ev elo p ed o v er several cen tu ries and yield s in crea sin g ly new r e su lts .9

R eaders were presented with explanations along the line o f this

attitu d e —for instance, in a polem ic with N arzy m ski’s com edy P ozy­

tyw ni :

A m o n g st o u r literati this m o v em e n t is represented in part by y o u n g p e o p le w ho situ a te them selves in scientific m atters o n the side o f C o m te , Littré, T a in e, M ill, S p en cer and o th e r such stan d ard -b earers o f scien ce; they p o p u la r ize their prin cip les, tran slate their w ork s and strive, c o m e w hat m ay, to serve the v icto ry o f the party they u p h o ld .10

8 A . Ś w i ę t o c h o w s k i , P rze g lą d p iśm ien n ictw a p o lsk ie g o . “ P o z y ty w iz m i je g o

w y zn a w c y w d zis ie jsz e j F ran cji” . N a p isa ł d r Z ie m b a ( A R e v ie w o f P olish W riting. ‘‘P o sitivism a n d Its A d h eren ts in C o n te m p o ra ry F ran ce.” W ritten b y D r. Z ie m b a ), ibidem , 1873, nr 23.

9 A . Ś w i ę t o c h o w s k i , A u gu ste C o m te a n d H e rb e rt S p en cer, ibidem , 1872, nr 21.

10 [A n o n y m o u s], T eatr. “P o z y ty w n i” . K o m ed ia w I V a k ta c h N a rzy m sk ie g o ( T heatre.

10

In the earliest statem ents issued by its Polish adherents. Positivism

appeared above all as a certain m ethodological tendency, in the widest

sense.

T o state n o th in g w ith o u t evid en tial su p p ort —to refrain from ca teg o rica l ju d g em en t in d u b io u s m atters —and to o b ser v e c o m p le te silen ce on utterly u n a tta in a b le o n es: that is the entire basis o f P ositivism —

declared Julian O chorow icz in 1872. But a few pages later he added:

we d esign ate as p o sitiv e p h ilo so p h y the system o f the ph en o m en a l law s that govern the w orld, and o f the fu n d a m e n ta l law s that o u g h t to direct a ctio n s. T h e first section co n stitu tes the theory, the se co n d , the p ractice, o f p o sitiv e p h ilo s o p h y .11

Indeed, am ong the rem arks u ttered ab o u t Positivism by the young

press there began to ap p ear groups o f statem ents o f an ontological

nature, opinions in the realm o f psychology and sociology, as well as

socio-political and ethical injunctions.

It seem s —rep orts S ie n k ie w ic z — as if the P o sitiv ists, ju st like id ealists, delib erately selected their nam e as the least d ivisive so as to co n cea l fun d a m en ta l d ifferen ces in religiou s and social o u tlo o k s , in view s con cern in g the road o n e o u g h t to take in order to ach ieve the greatest w elfare o f the p u b lic —a n d . finally, in o p in io n s regarding the m ean s w hereby this p u b lic co u ld a v o id , rem ove or crush the d ifficu lties e n c o m p a ss­ ing i t . 12

It w as then —recalls C h m ie lo w sk i— that D arw in 's theories, so c ia l e c o n o m ie s, practical ca m p a ig n s to raise the level o f the co u n tr y 's prosp erity, and the cu ltiv a tio n o f the natural and technical sc ien ces b ecam e the fu n d am en tal a x io m s o f P o sitiv ism and co n stitu ted the ob je cts o f y o u th 's m ost vital con cern , as it so u g h t by m ean s o f light to draw a part o f the p u b lic to i t s e lf .u

It is an o th er m atter th at when practical side o f the problem

alone cam e und er consideration o th er definitions were usually em ploy­

ed: “organic w ork” o r “w ork at the fo u n d a tio n s.” A nd the Positivists

them selves m ore often referred to their own groups o f sup p o rters by

such nam es as “y o u th ,” “the young press,” “the progressives,” “the

party o f progress” etc. All this tim e an ongoing polem ic was being

waged in the young press against the m isunderstandings, reproaches

11 J. O c h o r o w i c z . W stęp i p o g lą d o g ó ln y na filo zo fię p o z y ty w n ą (A n In trodu ction

to a n d G en eral View o f P o sitiv e P hilosoph y), W arszaw a 1872. p. 91, 94.

12 H. S i e n k i e w i c z , B ez tytu łu (U n title d ), (in:] D zie ła I W orks), v ol. 47. W arszaw a 1950. p. 53.

^ P. C h m i e l ó w s k i. Z a r y s lite ra tu r y p o ls k ie j z ostatn ich la t szesn a stu (A n O u tlin e

The D ia lectic o f Polish P o sitivism

11

and insinuations laid at the d o o r o f Positivism by the conservatives

(vulgar m aterialism , m oral nihilism , cosm opolitism 14), together with an

internal discussion betw een the m ovem ent’s radical an d its conciliatory

wing over the issue o f the content a “co rrect” and “h ealth y”

Positivism w ould have to have. D etaching him self from “the negativists”

who discard “trad itio n , peace, faith and d ev o tio n ,” Ju lian O choro-

wicz form ulated as early as 1875 his positivist credo, couching it in

term s such as could not arouse the reservations o f the m oderate

conservatives:

O ur P o sitiv ism —to w h ich the p resent w riter a lso ad h eres —is prim arily the rational aspect o f all the law s and facts that scien ce has co n firm ed or will confirm in the future, it is a theory that atta ck s n o o n e an d v io la te s n o o n e ’s co n sc ien ce but slo w ly and grad u ally d ev elo p s itself, gro w s and rem ains h u m b le, b ein g m erely the first fruit o f the resu lts that w ill em erge in the future from the im m en se w o rk sh o p o f in tellects in q uirin g in to all the v a rio u s d o m a in s o f k n o w led g e. It d o e s n o t flit ab ou t th e h eaven s after the w ill-o ’-th e-w isp s o f c o sm ic m ysteries, nor d o e s it craw l a lo n g earth -b o u n d , ex cep t in its m axim o f practicality. It reco g n izes historical c o n tin u ity and gives the ideal m o tiv es o f trad ition a free han d to act w ith d iscretio n . It a d o res all the lo fty and n o b le th in gs that the h u m an heart has b rou gh t forth and issu es the safest d irectives, for in b a sin g the directives for grow th u p o n o b se r ­ v ation an d exp erim en t an d in ex clu d in g d ayd ream s and prejudices from the realm o f k n o w led g e, it seek s to b e c o m e the w a tch m a n by the h ig h w a y o f research, sh ield in g from error and lig h tin g up the c h o se n r o a d .15

14 See for in sta n ce E. L u b o w s k i, D o re d a k c ji cza so p ism a " K lo sy ” (T o the E d ito rs

o f . . . ) , “ K lo s y ” , 1872, nr 343; [a n o n y m o u s], P r ze g lą d p r a s y p e r io d y c zn e j (A R e view o f the P e rio d ic a l P ress), ibidem , 1872, n o s. 344 and 347. In c o n n e c tio n w ith these atta ck s the

feu illeto n ist o f “P rzegląd T y g o d n io w y ” w rote as fo llo w s (1873, nr 15, Echa w a r­

s z a w s k ie — W arsaw E choes): “ F or q u ite a tim e n ow P o sitiv ism has b een p la y in g the

role o f the c o c k in K ra sic k i’s fable. [T ran slator’s n ote. In the fable co n cern ed a servant co m m a n d ed by her m istress to rise at c o c k -c r o w k ills the c o c k , h o p in g that th is w ill en d her early rising. In fact, her m istress rose b efo re c o c k -c r o w , and since there w as n o lo n g er a n y c o c k , w o k e her servant still earlier.] It has even b eco m e rather fa sh io n a b le to d iscern in P o sitiv ism the r o o t o f all evil. Last T h u rsd ay, for in sta n ce, it sto o d b efo re the bar o f the p resent crim in al co u rt accu sed o f co n trib u tin g t o . . . th e crim e o f m urderin g the m arried c o u p le , M r. an d M rs. G ą s o w s k i! Mr. W ro tn o w sk i, the c h ie f c o u n se l for the d efen ce o f o n e o f the a ccu sed , m aintain ed that th e d efen dan t h ad c o m m itte d th e crim e sw a y ed by the th e o ries o f D arw in , C o m te , M ill an d o th e r such m a te ria lis ts \ H is ard ou r in d efen ce ev en d rove M r. W rot­ n o w sk i to thunder at o u r tran slators a n d p u b lish ers for p ro v id in g o u r p u b lic with such p o sitiv e and n atu ral scien tific w o r k s.”

15 J. O c h o r o w i c z , P o z y ty w iz m i n e g a ty w izm (P o sitiv ism a n d N e g a tiv ism ), “N i ­ w a ”, 1875, v ol. V II, p. 85.

12

The controversies outlined above an d the will to reach an

understanding with o n e ’s o p p o n en ts o n m atters o f practice caused the

leaders o f the young them selves rapidly to rem ove the w atchw ord

“Positivism ” from their banners. As early as 1876 a publicist w rote in

“Przegląd T ygodniow y” :

E q u ally strange w as the lo o k o f the em b lem s o f P o sitiv ism and Id e a lism w hich were in creasingly u sed to d esig n a te the gro u p s or c a m p s o f w riters that w ere c o m in g into b ein g. D esp ite the difficulty o f severing sc ien ce from life, d e sp ite the actu al fact that in the p ractices o f certain W estern so c ie tie s ten d e n c ies o f a scien tific or d o g m a tic p ersuasion are lin k ed to trends in fa ctio n a l p o litic s [ ...] n everth eless, p h ilo so p h ica l m o v em e n ts o r sc h o o ls , since they are ex p ressio n s o f certa in th e o re tic a l

trends, can n ow h ere b eco m e the p a lp a b le e m b lem s o f th o se fa c tio n s that c o n stitu te

the visib le form o f particular a sp ira tio n s to a ctio n [ ...] T h ese p se u d o -p h ilo so p h ic a l signs, d erivin g from an o v erh a sty urge to cla ssific a tio n , h ave n o w forfe ited their im portan ce even in the ey es o f th o se w h o se g o o d faith to o k them for the em b lem s o f literary f a c t io n s .16

A t the beginning o f the following decade Świętochowski will

enigm atically term “ill-starred” Positivism “a purely legendary b a n ­

ner,” 17 and Chm ielow ski will justify him self in the nam e o f the young:

O ne ou g h t to realize that, ju st as the sp o k esm e n o f o u r R o m a n ticism , in the early years o f its d ev elo p m en t, held the nam e itse lf to be a c o m p le te m isn o m er for their p oetry, so the sp o k esm e n for P o sitiv ism have rep eated ly reiterated that this e x p ressio n d o es n ot reveal the actu al features o f the line o f th o u g h t a lo n g w hich they have been ad van cin g. W hy then did they a ccep t the term all the sa m e? S im p ly b ecau se they co u ld find no su p erior or m ore fitting o n e ; and sin ce in F rance and England a new interest in P o sitiv ism w as a w a k en in g , they a d ju d ged that they o u g h t to assu m e the n am e o f P o sitiv ists as their nom de g u e rre . 18

F or the o th er co-founders o f the break (O rzeszkow a, Sienkiewicz)

“Positivism ,” in the long run, m ost often represented a m ore p h ilo ­

sophical stan d p o in t rapidly ab andon ed as “a youthful e rro r bro u g h t

on by the general erro r o f the tim es.” 19 T hus it is h ardly surprising

16 [A n o n y m o u s], S tro n n ictw a i k o te r ie [F a ctio n s a n d C ó te r ie s), “ P rzegląd T y g o d n io ­ w y ” , 1876, nr 9. D u rin g the sam e year the term “ W arsaw p o sitiv ism ” ap p eared in a paper by K . R a s z e w s k i , W k w e s tii p o z y ty w iz m u (T h e P o sitiv ist Q u estion ), “ B ib lio ­ teka W arszaw sk a”, 1876, v ol. I, p. 204.

17 [A. Ś w i ę t o c h o w s k i ] , Z a m k n ię c ie ro k u (C lo sin g down f o r the Year), “ Praw ­ d a ” , 1882, nr 52.

18 C h m i e l o w s k i , Z a r y s lite ra tu r y p o l s k i e j . . . , p. 65.

19 E. O r z e s z k o w a , L is ty ze b ra n e (C o lle c te d L e tte rs ), v ol. 5, W ro cła w 1961, p. 179 (to T. B och w ic d ated 9 (22) IV 1909).

The D ia lectic o f P olish P o sitivism

13

th a t C hm ielow ski, the first historian o f the period, applied the term

far m ore sparingly to literary w orks th an to intellectual trends in

general. In his history o f literature he subsum ed the period after 1864

under the heading: “T he E ra o f Philosophical Positivism and A esthetic

R ealism ,” repeating yet again th a t by “Positivism ” he does not m ean

at all

a given , r ig o ro u sly defined p h ilo so p h ic a l theory (th at o f A u g u ste C o m te ) but rather the asp ira tio n to erect an ed ifice o f th o u g h t a n d a plan o f life o n the certain ties attain ed through exp erim en t and subject to d e m o n str a tio n at any and every t im e .20

T hus, rath er th an C hm ielow ski, it was T eod or Jeske-C hoiński, the

o p p o n en t o f “the progressives,” who perm anently linked the term

“Positivism ” with literary w orks in his books P ozytyw izm warszawski

i jeg o główni przedstawiciele ( Varsovian Positivism and Its C h ief

E xponents, 1885) and Typy i ideały pozytyw nej b eletrystyki polskiej

( The Types and Ideals o f Positive Polish Belles-lettres, 1888). C om pendia

and school textbooks were later to retain this nom enclature (am ong

o th ers —A. Bruckner, G. K o rb u t, K. W ojciechowski, M. Szyjkowski,

M . K ridl). Aureli D rogoszew ski (1932)21 considered Polish Positivism

to be “an intellectual m ovem ent em bracing a period o f ab o u t a q u arte r

o f a century after 1864;” hence he also ascribed to it various

Stańczykites* as the conservative off shoots o f Positivism . Z ygm unt

Szwejkowski (1929)22 placed heavy stress o n the philosophical sub-

-structure o f Positivism (subsequently recollected by K aro l Lilienfeld-

-K rzew sk i,23 and usually m ade light o f —witness the deft hard o f

* [T ran slator’s note] S tań czyk is the d esp o n d e n t jester in a p a in tin g b y M atejko sittin g n ext to an o p en p iece o f paper recordin g the lo ss o f S m o le ń sk in 1514. “T eka S ta ń c z y k a ” (S ta ń czy k ’s P o r tfo lio ) to o k its n am e from th is figure an d w a s the m ain o r g a n o f the G a licia n co n se r v a tiv e s; it b egan p u b lish in g in 1869 and w as highly critical o f p ast and present co n sp ira c ie s.

20 P. C h m i e l o w s k i , H isto ria lite ra tu ry p o ls k ie j (A H isto r y o j Polish L itera tu re), W arszaw a 1900, v ol. 6, p. 195.

21 A . D r o g o s z e w s k i , P o z y ty w iz m p o ls k i (P olish P o sitiv ism ), L vov 1943, p. 3. 22 Z. S z w e j k o w s k i , P o z y ty w iz m p o ls k i (P o lish P o sitiv ism ), “ P rzegląd W sp ó ł­ c z e sn y ” , 1929, nr 83.

23 K . L i l i e n f e l d - K r z e w s k i , " Z a r y s lite ra tu r y ” P. C h m ielo w sk ieg o o w a lce m ło­

dych z e s ta r y m i (P . C h m ielów sk i's “ O u tlin e o f L itera tu re" a n d the S tru g g le o f Youth w ith A g e ), [in:] P ra ce h is to r y c zn o lite r a c k ie . K sięg a zb io ro w a ku c z c i Ign acego C h rza ­ n o w sk ieg o (E ss a y s in L ite r a r y H isto ry . A F e stsc h rift f o r Ig n a cy C h rza n o w sk i), K ra k ó w

14

C hm ielow ski), as well as tracing its evolution from m aterialist tendencies

tow ards spiritualism .

A t the same tim e, however, during the tw enty inter-w ar years,

“Positivism ” began to be elim inated from the history o f literatu re

as the p erio d ’s nam e an d was replaced by the term “realism ” (T. G r a ­

bowski, J. K leiner, S. Cywiński), a term referring to features peculiar

to literature, which can be correlated with the then cu rren t tendency

to treat the history o f literature as the history o f changing artistic

trends o r styles.24

The attitu d e o f M arxist literary history to this p roblem has been,

as is know n, a variable one. The initial b ro a d n otion o f Positivism

as an entire literary epoch, plus the acceptance o f its secularizing,

dem ocratic and realistic trad itio n s evinced by the jo u rn alists o f

“K uźnica” and by the u n dertaking o f research into this area by

team s, soon underw ent fundam ental revision. Its traces can be seen

in the uncom pleted anthology Kultura epoki pozytyw izm u ( The Culture

o f the Positivist Epoch, 1949 — 50) and in the collection o f studies by

The Institute o f Literary Studies P ozytyw izm (Positivism , 1950 — 51)

under the editorship o f Ja n K ott. D uring the years th a t im m ediately

followed, and as a result o f the application o f rigorous criteria for

the m easurem ent o f progressiveness (m aterialism , revolutionism , n a ­

tional liberation m ovem ents), the ideological system referred to as

Positivism was not only valued less, bu t also m inim ized in ex ten t: it

was interpreted prim arily as the an ti-revolution ary ideology o f the pact

between bourgeois and landow ner, and as conciliatory tow ards the

partitioners. In discussions o f literary history there was an increasingly

frequent tendency to ascribe to Positivist ideology only such slogans as

served the exclusive interests o f the bourgeois class, nam ely, for

instance, the ad o p tio n o f the “P ru ssian ” road to capitalism o r the

principle o f social solidarity. H u m an itarian ideas, however, together

with any exaltation o f dem ocrate form s o f life o r o f elem ents o f the

scientific world-view, were declared to be foreign m atter w ithin

Positivism, and even incom patible with it, an d were treated as a specific

“bourgeois dem ocratic tra d itio n ” o r as a side-effect o f the ra d ia tio n s

o f revolutionary-dem ocratic ideology.

24 See S. C y w i ń s k i , S p ra w a p o d zia łu d zie jó w lite ra tu ry p o lsk ie j na o k r e sy

The D ia lectic o f Polish P o sitivism

15

T hese m ethodological strategies and ruses were subjected to polem ic

in the pap er Positivism and Critical Realism (1955), bu t this m erely led

to the carefully-fram ed conclusion th at “w ithin the literature o f critical

realism the essential features o f Positivist ideology were fu nd am en ­

tally tran sform ed, althou gh no overt break with them to o k place. Its

prog ram m atic dem ands and apologies for capitalist activity (expressed

through positive heroes) d isappeared, whilst the progressive co m ­

po nents o f Positivism and the social criticism th at resulted from

them rem ained. [...] m agnified m any tim es over in co m p arison with

the form s they to ok in Positivist journ alism , even in th a t o f the

closing p h a se .” 25

It is to recent research, carried o u t above all by historians o f social

thought, th a t we owe the deserved rehabilitation o f m any o f the

intellectual values o f P o sitivism .26 N evertheless, the theoretical co n­

stru ction has been preserved th a t attrib u tes n arrow tem poral boundaries

and a large degree o f ideological unanim ity to Positivism (the

organicist p ro gram m e; the struggle with o u td ated feudal hab its; scien­

tism ; a program m e for the secularization o f culture).

2

Every researcher in the hum anities is obviously fully entitled to

expand o r co n tra ct trad itio n al concepts, assum ing, th a t is, th a t the new

proposal is sufficiently precise (i.e., th a t the co n cep t’s scope is clearly

delim ited), does n ot diverge too widely from the accepted m eaning

(i.e., encom passes the m ajority o f the phenom ena to which people

had previously agreed to apply the term concerned) and, above all,

assum ing th a t it legitim ates itself as purposeful —th a t is, as p rom o tin g

25 H. M a r k i e w i c z , P o z y ty w iz m a re a lizm k r y ty c z n y , [in:] T ra d ycje i re w izje

{T ra d itio n s a n d R evision s), K ra k ó w 1957, p. 189.

26 See fo r in stan ce J. R u d z k i : Z laickich tra d y c ji w a rsza w sk ie g o p o z y ty w iz m u

(W ith in the S ecu lar T radition o f W arsaw P o sitiv ism ), “ M yśl F ilo z o fic z n a ” , 1957. nr 2;

Z zagadn ień p o z y ty w is ty c z n e j teo rii p o stę p u (Issu es in the P o sitiv ist T heory o f P ro g ress), "Studia S o c jo lo g ic z n o -P o lity c z n e ” , 1959, nr 2; J. K r a j e w s k i , Julian O ch o ro w icz ja k o

a u to r filo zo fic zn e g o p ro g ra m u p o z y ty w iz m u w a rsza w sk ie g o (Julian O ch o ro w icz a s the A u th o r o f th e P hilo so p h ica l P ro g ra m m e o f W arsaw P o sitiv ism ), [in:] C h aristeria. R o zp ra w y filo z o fic zn e zło żo n e w d a rz e W ła d y sła w o w i T a ta rk ie w ic zo w i (C h a risteria . P h ilo so p h ic a l P a p ers P re se n te d to W. T a ta rk ie w ic z), W arszaw a 1960; J. H o l z e r , " M y i wy" p o stu leciu (" Y ou a n d Us" a C e n tu ry L a te r), “K u ltu r a ”, 1963, nr 20.

16

a clearer and m ore adeq uate structurin g o f the strip o f reality un der

exam ination. The “n arro w ” conceptio n o f Positivism undoubtedly

satisfies all these c rite ria : in particular, it perm its o ne to dem on strate

the diverse, internally antagonistic and class-determ ined ch aracter o f

Polish culture during the second h alf o f the 19th century. T his has

been the m ain trend in M arxist research up to this tim e —a tendency

th a t is surely accurate and, m oreover, indispensable as a revision o f

traditio nal notions. A revision th a t nevertheless slipped dow n to the

level o f a one-sidedness w hose consequence was the disappearance

from view o f th a t cu ltu re’s unifying features, as well as o f the bases

for its further tran sfo rm atio n during the im perialist era. The present

paper is an attem p t to outline the m ode o f perceiving reality an d the

style o f though t th a t shaped Polish culture during the period o f pre-

-m onopolistic capitalism : an attem p t u n d ertak en from a view point that

sees literature as expressive o f this world-view and observes the

world-view’s intraliterary consequences.

One ado pts the term “w orld-view ” n o t w ithout hesitation, fo r as

a com pound w ord it enjoys scant favour am ong som e o f the specialists

in linguistic correctness. N evertheless, it is indispensable, for “a view

o f the w orld” is b oth cum bersom e in use an d narrow er in m eaning,

whilst “ideology” is used above all to designate a com plex o f ideas

peculiar to a well-defined class o r social group, whose interests they

further.

The world-view th at is here term ed “P ositivism ” (strictly speaking,

one w ould have to say: Positivism in the broad sense) has a scope

roughly corresponding to w hat W. T atarkiew icz calls scientism and

D. G . C harlto n , the Positivist état d ’esprit. 27 A m ong its constitutive

elem ents one should distinguish scientism above a l l - i n the narrow

sense o f the w ord, th at is, as a faith in science based on experim ent

an d ratiocin atio n as the sole source o f reliable know ledge and

efficacious directives to correct action.

Science —w rites O rzeszk o w a in her y o u th —grants h u m an ity the m ean s to co n q u er the forces o f external nature; scien ce, in illu m in a tin g co n c e p ts, g u id es n a tio n s tow ard s p eace, co n c o r d , w ealth and virtue. S cien ce k ills d a y d rea m s and idle, su p erstitiou s

27 W. T a t a r k i e w i c z , H isto ria f ilo z o fii (T h e H isto r y o f P h ilo so p h y), vol. 3, W ar­ szaw a 1950, p. 101; D . G . C h a r l t o n , P o sitiv ist Thought D uring the S eco n d E m p ire, O xford 1959.

The D ia lectic o f P olish P o sitivism

17

h o p es, and d irects m an to delve into his earthly ex isten ce an d perfect it for h im self and o th e rs; finally, in c o n d u c tin g m an to se lf-k n o w le d g e , it b e sto w s u p o n him a sense o f h is o w n p ow er and p rob ity, o n the basis o f w h ich he d esires to be h im self, to thin k , live and act by his o w n lig h ts .28

Socialism is accom panied by a m ore o r less consistent n atu ral

m onism , which conceives o f history as a specific variety o f the proces­

ses o f nature, as p a rt o f them , and accordingly holds historical

changeability to be a law -governed phenom enon, subject to d eter­

m inism :

O ne is co n cern ed here [ ...] n o t w ith an u n relen tin g fate o r a blind n ecessity, but w ith h istorical d ev elo p m en t, w h ich , in o u r o p in io n , d ep en d s u p o n strictly defined ca u se s; for w e m ust reco g n ize as a fact that cau se an d effect prevail w ithin the spiritual life a lso , and that every su b seq u en t in tellectu al and m oral state is a necessary o u tc o m e o f its p r e d e c e sso r .29

In particular, Positivism endow s m aterial agencies w ith a consider­

able, and at times decisive, significance in the totality o f social life.

N o o n e has ever seen —cried the P o sitiv ists — a n a tio n that w as p o o r, ill-eq u ip p ed w ith m aterial resources, an d deprived o f the b enefits o f h ig h ly -d ev elo p ed trade, that at the sam e tim e attain ed a high standard o f ed u c a tio n or brou gh t forth first-rate scholars, artists or p o ets. 20

W ork g en erates w ea lth ; w ealth , learning; and learning, virtue — is O r zeszk o w a ’s lap id ary d e c la r a tio n .21

We consider the signs o f Positivism in the ethic-social system to be

eudaim onistic utilitarianism (i.e. the ap p ro b a tio n o f useful behaviour

with an eye to the satisfaction o f needs an d h u m an w elfare); the

evaluation o f individuals and social groups according to their p ro d u c ti­

vity (broadly u n derstood i.e. as the creation o f new m aterial and

spiritual values); the p ostulate o f individual liberty and equality o f

rights, o p p o rtu n ities and duties w ithin society; and, finally, “practicism ”

(i.e. the setting o f attain ab le ends and a careful selection o f the

28 L i . . . k a [E. O rzeszk ow a], O “ H isto rii c y w iliz a c ji a n g ie lsk ie j” p r z e z H en ry k a

T o m a sza B u ckle'a (O n H . Th. B u c k le ’s "H isto ry o f C iv iliza tio n in England"), “G azeta

P o ls k a ”, 1866, nr 158.

29 P. C h m i e l o w s k i , S ta ty s ty k a i m oraln ość ( S ta tistic s a n d M o r a lity ), “ P rzegląd T y g o d n io w y ”, 1871, nr 50.

20 C h m i e l o w s k i , P o z y ty w iz m i p o z y ty w iś c i, p. 101.

21 E. O r z e s z k o w a , O je d n e j z n a jp iln iejszych p o tr z e b sp o łe c ze ń stw a n a szeg o (O n

O ne o f O ur S o c ie ty 's M o st U rgent N eeds). “ N iw a ” , 1873. nr 25.

18

m eans o f their realization). In the language o f the jo u rn alism o f the

tim e:

T he m ain co n tem p o ra r y trend in o u r so c ieties is utilitarian ism . W e ca st asid e all that d o e s n o t p o sitiv e ly in flu en ce the d ev e lo p m e n t o f h u m an ity, that a d d s n o bricks to the great edifice w h o se c o m p le tio n is the en d o f o u r ex isten ce. T h is edifice is the grow th an d h ap p in ess o f so cieties.

[Can therefore] m a n ’s p ersonal interest rem ain in stron g and lastin g agreem ent w ith the interests o f so c iety w ith o u t e x p o sin g him to sacrifices an d co stly effort? T here ca n be n o d o u b t a b o u t the an sw er to this q u estio n . F irstly, ed u ca tio n p ro v id es every m ea n s a n d o p p o rtu n ity o f tra n sfo rm in g a narrow and sh a llo w e g o tism in to a deep a n d ex p a n siv e lo v e o f the general g o o d , a n d , se co n d ly , life is grad u ally fa sh io n in g the c o n v ic tio n w ithin every th o u g h tfu l m ind that no h on est a ctivity ever lo se s through b e n e f itin g o th e rs and that private interest can yield its h igh est profits o n ly w hen in h a rm o n y with the so c ia l law.

T he n o tio n o f eq u a lity b etw een m en an d b efore the law is the n ob lest a cq u isitio n , an d c h ie f ch aracteristic, o f o u r recent tim es. N o tio n s o f c a s t e ‘and n o b le b lo o d no lo n g er even p ro v o k e in d ig n a tio n , o n ly h earty laughter. H u m a n ity has realized, late in the day p erhaps, but clearly: that the o n ly n o b ility o f earth is lab ou r, an d th o se w ho d em a n d o b ser v a n c e in the n am e o f oth er la w s m eet w ith fitting m ockery.

T h e ten dency to in d ep en d e n c e and self-su fficien cy [ ...] liberated lab ou r from su b servien ce to the gu ild s, lifted the y o k e o f slavery and serfd o m , created a u to n o m y o f th e co m m u n ity , lim ited an d d efined p arental p o w er an d o verth rew all au th orities in s c ie n c e .32

This is the Positivist world-view in outline, including all its basic

com ponents, which can easily be deduced from the situation o f the

Polish “th ird estate” at the tim e —th at is, o f the classes and social

form ation s variously interested in their ow n em ancipation and in the

grow th o f an industrial civilization.

T h e asp ira tio n s o f the c o n tem p o ra r y w o rk in g cla ss —w rites “ W alka K la s” — in c o n siste n t agreem en t w ith the e c o n o m ic u p h eaval they m ust bring a b o u t, [ ...] rest o n th e b asis o f p h ilo so p h ic a l m o n ism , a n d h en ce o f a th e ism , d eterm in ism and u tilitarian ism w ith respect to view s o f m o ra lity and in eth ica l practice; o n the b asis o f the ev o lu tio n o f all in stitu tio n s, arran gem en ts an d rela tio n sh ip s (a n d thu s o f m arital, parental and ed u ca tio n a l rela tio n sh ip s e tc.): o n the b a sis o f d em o cra tic rep u b lican ism in the d o m a in

32 A . P i l e c k i , 'S tan ow isko p o e z ji w o b e c p o zy ty w n e g o kierun ku n a sze j u m ysło w o ści

(T h e S ta n d p o in t o f P o e try with R e g a rd to O ur In tellectu a ls' P o sitiv ist T endency),

“P rzegląd T y g o d n io w y ” , 1873, nr 34; [a n o n y m o u s], In teres o so b isty a sp o łe c zn y

(In te re sts, P riv a te Versus S o c ia l), “N iw a ” , 1873, nr 48; A . Ś w i ę t o c h o w s k i , Z a b a w n ie i sm u tn o (L au gh able a n d Sad), “P rzegląd T y g o d n io w y ” , 1871, nr 4 8; [anon ym ou s]. Z e sto łu re d a k cyjn eg o (F rom the E d ito ria l C h air), “ N iw a ” , 1873, nr 29.

The D ia lectic o f Polish P o sitivism

19

o f p o litic s and the S tate etc. —in sh ort, o n a re a listic b asis, and here, n ow and everyw here, o n the basis o f the p rinciple o f solid arity. 33

T his phenom enon is all the easier to com prehend, since in the

course o f the historical developm ent between 1870 and 1890 alm ost

every single one o f the com ponents o f the Positivist world-view

disclosed its internal bipolarity, its “antithetical qu ality ” and , as it

were, split into two independent and op posed elem e n ts.34 Thus, Positi­

vist scientism uncovered its Jan u s aspect — its “sham efaced m aterialism ”

and its “sham efaced id ealism :” it h ad already reached m aterialist

conclusions in ontology, whilst its agnosticism had persuaded it to

tolerate, and even em otionally to accept, non-scientific idealist m eta­

physics. H ere are three statem ents by Eliza Orzeszkow a.

[1867] So I am rea d in g S c h o d le r ’s Book o f N a tu re o n ch em istry a n d , w hat is m ore — I u n d erstan d ev ery th in g I read, and am a u g m e n tin g this task w ith the read in g o f M o le s c h o o t’s De la circu la tio n de la vie; under the influence o f th is G erm an sage 1 feel m y se lf m ore and m ore a m aterialist.

[1884] C an this p erennial q u estio n [“Is there a n y o n e b ey o n d the stars?”] p o ssib ly be ju stly answ ered by: there is n o b o d y !? Spencer and all the P o sitiv ists have hesitated to give the answ er. “ W e d o n o t k n o w ,” they say. A n d if there is so m e o n e ? [ ...] and w e are tryin g to c o n v in c e o th e rs that there's n o b o d y ! S o m e d a y , o n e d a y , w ill n ot m illio n s u p o n m illio n s o f d esp airin g v o ic e s cry o u t to the graves o f the so n s o f ou r age: “ G iv e us back our G o d ! ” ? etc. etc.

[1896] W here o u r earth is con cern ed w e are n ot yet w ise en o u g h , and w here thin gs b e y o n d it are con cern ed , w e are blin d. E ven during the m o st refu lgen t earth ly brightness we are b en ig h ted ; the g reatest o f-u s is m inu te. But o u r d ark n ess an d ou r littlen ess —the fleetin gn ess an d rela tiv en ess o f all that is ou rs —d o n ot p rove the n o n -ex iste n c e o f an a b so lu te b righ tn ess and p erfection som ew h ere b ey o n d us. Q u ite the reverse, the earnests

33 [A n o n y m o u s], C h y b io n y za m a c h (A F ailed C ou p), “ W alka K la s” , 1885, nr 10 — 12. A . M o l s k a , N a u k a a so c ja lizm w ujęciu p ie rw szy c h m a rk sistó w p o lsk ic h ( S cien ce or

S o cia lism a s U n d ersto o d b y the First Polish M a r x is ts ), “S tu d ia F ilo z o fic z n e ” , 1964,

nr 4 , n o te s w ith rem ark ab le in sigh t : “ If o n e had to p o in t to a p h ilo so p h ic a l ten dency w hich —m u ta tis m u tan dis — fulfilled a sim ilar h istorical ‘m issio n ’ in the d ev elo p m en t o f M arxist th o u g h t in P o la n d to the role H eg elia n ism p layed for M arx, then o n e w o u ld p o in t w ith o u t h esita tio n to p h ilo so p h ica l P o sitiv ism in the broad sense. T h o u g h w ith th is difference, that in the P o lish case o n e sh o u ld sp eak o f an a d a p ta tio n rather than an o v e r c o m in g o f P o sitiv ism : and o n e that to o k p lace, o n e ad d s, w ith ou t co m p lic a ted strategies to ‘sta n d it o n its fe e t’.”

34 M . Ż m i g r o d z k a d ev e lo p e d a sim ilar c o n c e p tio n o f P o sitiv ism in her w orks:

O r ze s z k o w a , v o l. 1: M ło d o ść p o z y ty w iz m u (P o sitiv ism in Its Youth), W arszaw a 1965; O r z e s zk o w a a p o z y ty w iz m (O r z e sz k o w a a n d P o sitiv ism , a lecture given at the In stitu te o f

20

o f them —the c o n cep t o f them , the lo n g in g for them —w hich w e p o sse ss w ithin ou rse lv es seem to give p r o o f o f their prim al sou rce. T h ey w ell up w ithin u s to o , appear as tiny sparks o f a great co n fla g ra tio n : there is a reason w hy they exist w ithin us and a reason w hy w e e x i s t .35

N atural m onism , althou gh w earing the protective co lo ratio n o f

deism, liberated m an from a te rro r o f su pern atu ral pow ers an d was

the source o f the young P ositivists’ hum anist pride. In K o n o p n ick a’s

Fragmenty dram atyczne (Dramatic Fragments, 1891), the scholar Ve-

salius prophesies:

N ie ! Przyjdą w ieki n o w e, w y z w o lo n e Z n iew o ln iczeg o d la B ó stw a postrach u I praw d najw yższych sło n ec zn ą za sło n ę Ś m iało p o d n io są w tajem n ym tym gm ach u, G d zie B ó g p rzyrod zie przepisuje praw a, A p o d jej berło byt w szelk i p o d d a w a , S tłu m io n e dzisiaj rozb u d zą się g ło sy I n o w e prądy w pierś lu d zk ą u d e r z ą ... N o w y w id n o k rą g ro zszerzą n ie b io s y ... D u c h y w a lczą ce p o tę g ę sw ą zm ierzą Z zag a d k ą życia zw ik ła n ą , prastarą I w iedzą uczczą to , co d ziś czczą w ia r ą .36

[N o ! T here will d aw n new ages, freed / F rom slavish co w er in g at the D e ity — / Bravely w ithin this su n n y edifice / W here G o d prescribes the law s that nature rule / A n d subjugates ex isten ce to her o rb / T h ey will lift solar veils from highest tru th s — / V oices n ow stifled w ill aw a k en , / N e w curren ts will beat against the h um an b r e a s t... / T h e h ea v en s will o p en n ew h o rizo n s u p ... / A n d fighting spirits will test their pow er a gain st / T he c o m p le x , a g e-o ld riddle o f this life / A nd co n se cra te w ith k n o w led g e w hat to d a y faith co n secra tes.]

But in rendering m an dependent upon the action o f n atural laws,

in depriving him o f the hope o f im m ortality, and in attrib u tin g an

im po rtant role in the structuring o f ch aracter to biological factors

th at dom inated intellect and will, natural m onism m ade o f m an the

slave o f n ature, degraded him , and so gave im petus to pessim ism :

35 O r z e s z k o w a , L is ty ze b ra n e, v o l. 1, p. 11 (to Jan S ik orsk i, dated 27 V III 1867); v o l. 3, p. 67 (to J. K a rło w icz, d ated 18 (30) V III 1884); P anu Jan ow i K a rło w iczo w i (F o r M r. Jan K a rło w icz), [in:] M e la n c h o licy (M ela n ch o lics), v ol. 1, W arszaw a 1949, p. 13.

36 M. K o n o p n i c k a , Z p rz e s zło ś c i. F ra g m en ty d ra m a ty c zn e (O u t o f the P ast.

D ra m a tic F ragm en ts), [in:] P ism a w yb ra n e (S e le c te d W orks), vol. 6, W arszaw a 1951,

The D ia lectic o f P olish P o sitivism

21

[ ...] the lon ger I live and lo o k u p o n this p o o r w orld , stru gglin g, suffering so terribly and so v a r io u sly — w rites O rzeszk o w a — the m ore freq u en tly it occu rs to m e to ask w h ether the lo ss o f the illu sio n s an d c o n so la tio n s w ith w hich relig io u s b e lie f su p p lied it h itherto m ay n ot p rove to be o n e m isfo rtu n e m ore for i t . 37

N a tu ral m onism perm itted o f the exam ination o f h u m an relations

in categories derived from biology —an d here organicism , which

assigned an im p o rtan t position to the solidaristic “laws o f exchange

o f services,” m et with o ppo sition from the concept o f the struggle for

existence, which later led to Social D arvinism o r theories o f nation al

egoism. The early socialist ap p ro ach to class antagonism s — despite all

the clearly accentuated internal differences —took shape within this

concept’s sphere o f influence, a t least in P o la n d ; it was w ritten at

th at time th a t sociological science was indebted to M arx for “the

form ulation in the class struggle o f the m ost im p o rtan t social form o f

the ideological fight for existence;” 38 and whilst polem icizing with Prus,

Ludw ik Krzywicki d em anded:

W here d o w e d iscern this a b sen ce o f a fight for ex isten ce such a s o ccu rs b etw een the cells o f an an im al o rg a n ism ? Q u ite the con trary, w e see the c o n to u r s o f this struggle b eco m in g ever clearer th r o u g h o u t the so c ieties o f E u rop e; w e see the ex istin g E uropean so c ie tie s d isin teg ra tin g into so c ia l a to m s all scrab b lin g a m o n g th em selves o ver every crust o f bread; the richer ca p ita list g o b b le s up the w eaker: togeth er they crush the in d ep en d e n t hired m an; and the hired m en b attle a m o n g th em selves in c o m p e titio n . C an o n e take as p r o o f o f the u n ity that is su p p o sed to exist betw een in d ivid u als an d forge the so cia l organ ism the u n relen tin g stru ggle that is currently being w aged by the b o u rg eo isie and the p roletariat o f the W estern co u n tr ies? 39

D epending on w hether society is envisioned as organic o r in conflict,

its ceaseless change is interpreted either by stressing its gradual,

evolutionary character, within which revolution w ould be simply

a harm ful anom aly, o r by declaring revolution itself to be the lever o f

37 O r z e s z k o w a , L is ty ze b ra n e , v ol. 3, p. 66 (to Jan K a rło w icz dated 18 (30) VIII 1886).

38 C h yb io n y zam ach.

39 L. K r z y w i c k i , J e s zc z e o p ro g r a m ie (M o r e a b o u t the P ro g ra m m e), “ Przegląd T y g o d n io w y ” , 1883, nr 15. See H . D o m i n a s , S to su n ek p u b lic y stó w cza so p ism

so c ja listy c zn y c h ( “ R ów n ości" , “ P rze d św itu " , “ W a lk i k la s ” , " Ś w ia tła ” ) do socjaldar- w inizm u i darw in izm u (T h e S ta n d p o in t o f the P u b licists o f the S o c ia list P erio d ica ls

[ ...] to w a rd s D arw in ism an d S o cia l D a rw in ism ), [in:] M a te r ia ły do d zie jó w m y śli

ew o lu cyjn ej w P o lsce (M a te r ia ls f o r a H isto ry o f E v o lu tio n a ry Thought in P o la n d ),

22

historical progress. “N atu re does not leap like a hare bu t crawls like

a to rto ise” —urges P r u s .40 “ If history is to progress as it has done

hitherto, then revolution, i.e. violent upheaval, will be the necessary

supplem ent to evo lutio n” —states a socialist jo u rn a lis t.41

The vision o f h um an relations as conflictual becam e in its tu rn an

object o f b oth optim istic and pessim istic interp retation . The struggle

for existence —writes O rzeszkow a in 1873 —

u n d ersto o d as the rivalry b etw een ration al b ein g s for the m ost p erfect self-realization , for the broad est ex p a n sio n o f the circles o f correct a ctio n an d b eneficent influence, and for the largest p o ssib le share o f that p o w er, h ap p in ess and security that spring from the light o f k n o w led g e, the efforts o f rea so n , the industry o f the h an d s and the u n b en d in gn ess o f the w ill.—the struggle for ex isten ce is a p h en o m en o n both necessary and ju st, a n o b le duel that yield s p o sitiv e an d even suprem e results for h u m a n ity .42

But in 1884 A do lf D ygasiński heads his sh ort story Niezdara ( The

Aw kw ard One) with the ep igraph: “the noble p erish ,” and the story

Głód i miłość (Love and Hunger, 1885) closes with the sarcastic reflection:

T h u s the degree to w h ich h u m an lo v e is turned in to h ap p in ess o ften rem ain s directly p ro p o rtio n a te to the exch a n g e o f v irtu o u s life for a h u m ilia tin g trade. Y et th o se w ho p o ssess great treasures in their so u ls d o n o t ex ch a n g e them for m o n e y . T h ey and their like perish. G o d is g o o d an d bears w ith this, and for this reason is praised by a l l .43

A pplied to the h u m an individual, determ inism tied his character

and fate to environm ent and heredity. The first elem ent, environm ent,

appeared in conjunction with intellectualizing conceptions o f the

personality and in optim istic reflections, either as the Positivist

conviction o f the role o f education, o r as the socialist belief in the

transform ing pow er o f a new ord er. H eredity, however, coupled with

a recognition o f the prevailing force o f biological factors, was usually

the basis for pessim istic conclusions. H ere is C hm ielow ski’s optim istic

argum ent from the year 1871:

If we co n sid er h um an a c tio n s to be the n ecessary p ro d u cts o f external im pu lses as w ell as internal o n e s, then w e can rest assu red that in giving a m an a m oral

40 B. P r u s , P o stę p o w c y i za c h o w a w c y (P ro g re ssiv e s a n d C o n serva tives), “ K urier W arszaw sk i” , 1878, nr 285.

41 I k s B o g o m n o s [A. S ąsied zk i], S p ra w y ży w o tn e (L ivin g Issues), [in:] P ie rw sze

p o k o le n ie m a rk sistó w p o lsk ic h (T h e F irst G en eration o f Polish M a rx ists), v o l. 1,

W arszaw a 1962, p. 468.

42 O r z e s z k o w a , O je d n e j z n a jp iln iejszyc h p o tr z e b , p. 4.

43 A. D y g a s i ń s k i , G łó d i m iło ść, [in:] P ism a w ybran e (S e le c te d W orks), v ol. 9, W arszaw a 1950. p. 152.

The D ia lectic o f P olish P o sitivism

23

ed u c a tio n , in d irectin g his th o u g h ts to w a rd s truth an d in fa sh io n in g his feelin gs acco rd in g to the p atterns o f n o b ility an d g o o d n e ss, w e will be in stillin g in to him a d efinite ch aracter o f o n e ty p e o r a n o th er , d ep en d in g o n his natural ten d en cies —o n e w hich w ill be ca p a b le o f c o u n te ra ctin g m any o f the in stin cts, o f resisting v icio u s th o u g h ts an d o f sta m p in g his en tire b eh a v io u r w ith the particular seal that d ifferen tiates him from o t h e r s .44

A nd here is D ygasifiski’s pessim istic argum ent :

Let us recollect that a m an bears w ithin h im s e lf foreign d e m o n s as w ell a s his o w n self. T h e h eritage o f virtu es or sin s o fte n sleeps p ea cefu lly w ithin the d ep th s o f the o r g a n ism —w h en ever there are c o n d itio n s fa v o u r a b le to its d ev elo p m en t. N o o n e g o v ern s m atters o f th is kind by w ill-p o w e r, ju st as no m an fram es the law s o f life and d e a t h .45

T he thesis th a t social reality was determ inist in natu re presented

a sim ilar alternative. O ne could either view it as offering choices o f

freedom , o f h u m an ity ’s dom in atio n o f n atu re an d its ow n fate —in

accord w ith the C o m tean principle savoir pour pouvoir — o r discern in

it the Engelsian definition o f freedom as the recognition o f necessity.

T h e d isco v e ry that the law s active a m o n g us —w rites F elik s B o g a ck i —are n o th in g but the n ecessa ry , general and u n varyin g a cc o m p a n im e n ts o f certain effects by certain c a u se s d o e s m uch to increase the m o ra lity o f th o se w h o k n o w th is; it grants them a feelin g o f their o w n p o w ers: for if th e se law s are n o th in g but the a cco m p a n im en t o f ca u se by effect, then m an h im se lf can m odify the effects, m ore or less, alterin g and a d a p tin g to h is n eed s and en d s the circu m sta n ces that represent the ca u se s o f the e ffe c ts .46

W e d o n o t stand o u tsid e history but su b m it to its law s —sta ted L udw ik W aryński d uring th e trial o f so m e p roletarian s in 1885. —W e see the u p h eaval at w h ich we are a im in g as the result o f h isto rica l d ev elo p m en t and so c ia l c o n d itio n s. W e lo o k forw ard to it and strive n ot to be ca u g h t u n aw are by i t . 47

M eanw hile, however, A dam A snyk is tim idly an d laboriously

adding the final touches o f optim ism to his philosophico-historical

vision:

G in ą w m ęce rody i p lem io n a , C h o ć w alczyły z m ęstw em b o h a te r a ...

44 C h m i e l o w s k i , S ta ty s ty k a i m oraln ość. 45 D y g a s i ń k i , op. c it., p. 95 — 96.

46 F. B o g a c k i , Tło p o w ie ś c i w obec tla ży c ia (T h e B a c k g ro u n d o f the N o v e l N e x t

to the B a c k g ro u n d o f L ife), “P rzegląd T y g o d n io w y ” , 1891, nr 53.

47 P r zem ó w ien ie W aryń sk iego na sąd zie w arszaw sk im (W a ry ń sk i’s S p eech b efore a W arsaw C o u rt), [in:] P ie rw sze p o k o le n ie m a rk sistó w p o lsk ic h , v o l. 2, p. 611.

24

M n ó stw o p ragn ień n iezisz czo n y ch k on a. M n ó stw o uczu ć b ez p ło d n ie um iera. W szęd zie ciężk a na byt d alszy praca. W szęd zie w alki groza i m ęczarn ia, K tóra w n iw ecz zw y cięstw o ob ra ca I ofiary w ciem n ą p rzep aść zgarnia. I o d w ie c z n e nie troszczą się m o ce, C o przez c h w ilę na fali w y p ły n ie? C o za to n ie w zagład y p o m r o c e ? I c o zejd zie na św ieżej r u in ie ? 48

[Tribes an d lin es w ill die in torm ent / A lth o u g h they fo u g h t like heroes s t o u t . . . / M any w ish es u n fu lfilled w ill d ie, / M a n y feelin g s p erish fru itlessly. / E veryw here la b o u r just to carry o n , / E veryw here stru g g le’s threat a n d a n g u ish es, / W hich turns all co n q u e sts rou n d a b o u t, / G a th e rin g the fallen in ab yss. / A n d are the p ow ers ever u n tro u b led / A t w hat any m om en t m ay rise o n the w ave? / A t w hat m ay drow n in a n n ih ila tio n ’s m urk / A n d w hat d esc en d o n the recent w reck?]

Finally, we encounter a sim ilar p o larizatio n in the area o f social and

ethical slogans an d propositions. T he criterion o f social productivity,

which originally sanctioned the activity o f the organizers o f capitalist

m anufacture, later tu rn ed against them an d becam e an argum en t for

the ideology o f the Socialists and P opulists. A t first utilitarianism was

u nd ersto od as the principle o f “ra tio n a l egoism ,” which by serving

the public interest indirectly, but ultim ately m ost effectively, served the

interests o f the individual. O ver the course o f the years it was replaced

by the dem and for the unrelenting su b o rd in atio n o f the individual to

the prim acy o f the collective (national o r class) good, which h ad as

its educational slogans such w ords as “service,” “sacrifice,” “devo­

tio n ” —and thus required an im posed o r self-im posed restriction o f

freedom . A t the same tim e a decidedly egocentric attitud e com es into

being. To illustrate this with literary exam ples: O rzeszkow a’s heroes

anticipate those o f Żerom ski, and am ong Ś w iętochow skie declarations

we m eet with a foreboding o f m odernist individualism :

T o d ie ju st so as to beq u eath a few u seful w ork s to the pu b lic, to be a m ere o y ster the p u b lic sw a llo w s and forgets, to be d ev o id o f all eg o ism , so m eth in g for a n o th er

48 A . A s n y k , W w alce o b y t (In the S tru g g le fo r B eing), [in:] P ism a (W ritin g s), vol. 2. W arszaw a 1939. p. 200.

The D ia lectic o f Polish P o sitivism

25

p erso n ’s p a la te —that kind o f theory ca n be p ro cla im ed to b ulls in a slau gh terh ou se but not to a m an p o ssessed o f the right to p ersonal h a p p in e s s .49

O f all the thin gs p e o p le o w e m e —says R egin a, the h eroin e o f the dram a O jciec

M a k a r y ( Father M a k a r y ) —\ insist a b o v e all o n m y hu m an rights. F or m y se lf I am the

hub o f crea tio n . I w ill n o t be fo rced to sacrifice for a n y o n e, I do n o t w ish to learn virtue through a n g u ish , I k n o w no duty o f se lf-fo r g etfu ln ess [ ...] T here are as m any private w orld s a s there are p e o p le — I am o n e o f them , and I k n o w it. I d o n ot wish to stir o n ly w h en the herd m o v e s but to live p rivately for m y se lf and through m yself. 1 am p erm itted to exten d m y hu m an rights everyw here so lo n g as they d o not infringe u p o n the rights o f o t h e r s .50

It is obvious th at the “practicism ” m entioned in the in trod uctio n

justifies “organic w o rk ” and legalism to the sam e degree as it does

the later subm issive “realistic po licy :” this is b o rne o u t by num erous

well-know n docum ents o f the political th o u g h t o f the time. It is

however w orth rem em bering th a t the first Polish Socialists attached

an especial im p ortance to the nam e “ scientific socialism ,” which they

saw as scientific in its being m ore th an a “noble im pulse” o r an

“exercise in feeling h u m a n ita ria n ,” in its “discovering in the su r­

ro unding w orld a sufficient num ber o f facts to su p p o rt its aim s and

observing positive d ata so as to draw o u t positive conclusions,” and

thus, in its directing itself “according to th a t which is: reality.” 51

3

In the area o f literary pro d u ctio n social utilitarianism was the d o ­

m inant line. But it could take on two concrete form s —an d either

posit the tendentiousness o f literature, i.e. as a didactic and even

agitatory illustration o f a specific program m e, o r posit realism , on

account o f its epistem ological values.

The m ain line o f developm ent however leads —still un der the banner

49 A . Ś w i ę t o c h o w s k i , W y w ó z n a szej in telig en cji (T h e D e p o rta tio n o f O ur

In telligen tsia), “ P rzegląd T y g o d n io w y ” , 1874, nr 32.

50 A . Ś w i ę t o c h o w s k i , O jciec M a k a ry , [in:] D u sze n ieśm ierteln e ( Im m o rta l

Souls), W roclaw 1957, p. 97.

51 [Sz. D ik szta jn ], D ą żen ia so c ja listy c zn e na e m ig ra c ji p o ls k ie j 1831 (S o c ia list

Trends in the P olish E m ig ra tio n o f 1831), “ R ó w n o ś ć ” , 1880, nr 8 — 9; [a n o n y m o u s],

Z po w o d u o d e z w y S to w a r z y s ze n ia S o c ja listy c zn e g o " L u d P o lsk i" (In R e p ly to the A p p e a l

o f the S o c ia list O rg a n iza tio n o f "The P eo p le o f P oland"), “ Ś w it”, 1881, nr 6 — 7; [a n o ­

n ym ou s], D la c ze g o nie je s te ś m y a n a rch ista m i ( W hy W e A re n ot A n a rch ists), ibidem , 1886. nr 6 — 8 (q u o ted in M o l s k a . op. c it.. p. 54 and elsew h ere).