The aim of the paper is to highlight St. Anselm’s way of thinking about nature and order in the world created by God. God for Anselm is the highest nature, one which exists most fully; He possesses the fullness of being, because His essence is identical to His existence. He is the cause of all existing things and does not have a cause Himself, for He exists per se. The order of nature may be observed in two ways: when departing from the diversity of existing beings and when considering these beings before their creation, existing in the divine intellect as ideas and models, after which God called into existence particular objects.
Autor podjął próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie: czy i jak możliwa jest refleksja nad istnieniem? Wbrew ugruntowanej tradycją tezie, odrzuca on pogląd, zgodnie z którym Parmenidejskie pojęcie bytu ma charakter egzystencjalny. Twierdzi, że Parmenides, a za nim myśl starożytna, byt pojmuje poprzez określoność, a więc jako „coś”. Utrzymuje przy tym, że pojęcie „istnienia” na trwałe pojawiło się w myśli europejskiej dopiero w filozofii św. Tomasza z Akwinu. W proponowanym przez siebie rozumieniu autor utożsamia istnienie z mnogościąi różnorodnością prezentujących się momentów, które w porządku myślenia wyraża słówko „coś” (το ον), czyli pojęcie bytu. W przedstawionym ujęciu autor nie oddziela bytu od jego bycia. Tym samym refleksja nad bytem jest zarazem refleksją nad istnieniem.
The phenomenon of publication, in the same year, of two books having identical titles, is enough to study the theory presented therein. Both books feature the notion of culture, which was broadly elaborated by both authors: Antonina Kłoskowska and Raymond Williams already in their earlier analyses. It turns out, however, that no matter the title of a book interesting to us, culture is tackled differently in both of them. Williams seems to keep using anthropological definition of culture, while Kłoskowska suggests sociological approach. A reflection on culture by the English academic has shaped the character of British cultural studies and their subsequent follow-ups around the world. A question arises, to what extent the sociological approach by Kłoskowska may give impetus to cultural research in Poland, especially when symbolic culture appears beyond the principle of autotelism.
This article presents the problem of understanding Heideggerian ‘turn’ (Kehre) in the context of the most important aspects of his later philosophy. Since Heidegger had written (secretly) Contributions to Philosophy, he departed from his original philosophical assumptions, which had been presented in Being and Time. Heidegger’s turn was conceived as a discovery of truth of Being, as a project of another beginning, as proper asking about Being as such, as well as a discovery of a hidden aspect of being that is revealed in an event (‘enowning’).