The paper aims at locating argumentation schemes with hidden premises derived from shared cultural knowledge ( topoi) within philosophical models of communication and discourse referring to inference and argumentation (Robert B. Brandom’s semantic argumentation and related theories, Jean‑Claude Anscombre and Oswald Ducrot’s theory of argumentation‑in‑language). These models enable comparison of argumentation and topics with other inferential mechanisms that underlie communication. A solution for the problem of mutual knowledge, relevant from the viewpoint of topics, is scrutinised from psychologically‑ and sociologically‑oriented perspectives.

Etyka teistycznego absolutyzmu moralnego (TAM) musi, jak każda, zdefiniować dobro, ustanowić więź między dobrem a obowiązkiem oraz zastrzec sobie skuteczność. Argumentuję (z pomocą D. Hume’a, K. Gödla i L. Kołakowskiego), że teistyczna definicja dobra jest ostatecznie nieefektywna, więź między dobrem a obowiązkiem zawsze luźna, zaś skuteczność zasadniczo ograniczona. Nic w tym osobliwego, podobnie zawodzą inne etyki. TAM ma natomiast endemiczny kłopot pojęciowy, ale tę opowieść mam za sobą.

In this interview, conducted at the XXIII International Congress of Historical Sciences in Poznan, Antoon De Baets (emeritus professor of History, Ethics and Human Rights at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands) addresses key issues for historians and other produ-cers of history. His remarks about the scientific status of historiography and the range of different threats to history seem particularly important. He talks not only about the most direct crimes against historians and history, but also about issues like hindsight bias and fake news. The professional duties of historians and the issue of ethical codes for historians are also discussed.