Realised since the 1980’s, the project of the “city rebuilding” presupposes an environmental turn in city reform programmes and policies. & e purpose of this article is to demonstrate, how the agenda of the Country’s City Politics is being inspired by, and assimilates, the ideas of “being together” that have been worked out by city (social) movements. The society has come to be perceived as a source of “innovation”, or as possessing a certain, so far neglected, potential of development. In the governmental agendas, the ideals and claims of the social movements are operationalised” in such a way, as to identify society as a new resource of economic growth. The assimilation of the claims and ideals of the city movements into the governmental agendas becomes part of a new political rationality.

The article considers the issues of the value of invested capital, methods of its measurement and its growth mechanisms. The author draws attention to relationship between the value of capital and the paradigm of economics, which ultimately indicates the existence of connections between the effectiveness of investment and the philosophy of economics. The main purpose of the article is to identify abnormalities in the valuation of assets by investors due to their incorrect or incomplete understanding of the value growth mechanism, the effects of which may assume significance on a macroeconomic scale.

Business ethics – together with other branches of applied ethics – faces a challenge of the validity of its claims. These ethical claims must be convincing for participants of economic life and meet the requirement of impartiality. Of course, philosophical ethics helps in this search. Among many ethical propositions, the emphasis is on those that have sufficient epistemological grounding (often taking the form of a meta-ethical recommendations). Considering this condition, the choice of ethical tools is significantly reduced. For this reason, the search for ethical standards applicable in social practice is continued in the sphere of culture. Meanwhile, this widening of the research field must be done with caution. It is hard to find in culture an answer to the question about the criteria for ethical behavior. Culture, of course, is founded on such criteria. However, there are more of them than would be expected by an ethicist seeking – in this area – a solution to the problem of the validity of an ethical norm. The fact that complicates this search is that the changes that have been taking place in Western culture since the mid-twentieth century are very powerful. Their multi-faceted nature means that their systematization (carried out using the principle of non-contradiction) is not possible. The hypothesis regarding the complexity and heterogeneity of normative beliefs held by Western societies is confirmed (among others) by the analysis of processes initiated by the performative turn. Hence the choice of arguments offered by performance studies. They harmonize with the leading intention of this research paper. They explain why the world of cultural values – despite the multitude of practices of giving them significance – legitimately aspires to be the normative foundation of collective life, including economic life.

In the extensive polemic with the book Haunting History: For a Deconstructive Approach to the Past by Ethan Kleinberg, the reviewer comments on the innovative potential of deconstruction as it enables the conception of various scenarios of the future. Kleinberg’s reflections on the ontology (or hauntology) of the past are located within the current discussion about “the ontological turn.” The reviewer compares Kleinberg’s take on a deconstructive approach to the past with similar considerations presented by Sande Cohen in the US as well as by Keith Jenkins, Alun Munslow and, more recently, Berber Bevernage in Europe.

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’).

This article analyses the first traces of postsecular turn in historical theory, arguing that they first emerged in Dominick LaCapra’s book History and Its Limits: Human, Animal, Violence (2009) and in Allan Megill’s subsequent polemic with that work. The author claims that what prevails in LaCapra’s narrative is the rhetoric of “resisting apocalypse”, thus demonstrating how he inscribes postsecular themes with the issue of trauma, together with its religious connotations. The discussion between LaCapra and Megill is treated here as a point of departure for considering the forms that the postsecular can take in historical theory.

This article deals with recent Polish herstory narrations, i.e. works of fiction that, while relying on distinctly literary techniques and devices, foreground the feminine experience of history, and moreover, may be associated with the so-called Herstory Turn in Polish humanities and cultural studies. This category of fictions includes also novels in which the herstory narration belongs to a female subject created by a male author, notably Jacek Dehnel’s Abbess Macryna (Matka Makryna), Ignacy Karpowicz’s Little Sonya (Sońka) and Jarosław Kamiński’s Just Lola (Tylko Lola). These three novels are analyzed with the aim of showing how their narrative strategy foregrounds the women narrators/main characters (acting as history’s true subjects), identifying the marks of authorial imitation of the feminine discourse, and, finally, asking the question about man’s status in an ostensibly feminine text. It seems that one way of answering it would be to point to the male author’s validating the feminine experience of history and ensuring that it can be heard.

In the paper I present the famous argument between Peter F. Strawson and Bertrand Russell on definite descriptions. I do not go into details of the two rival solutions to the problem of definite descriptions. Instead I present the controversy against the background of two traditions within analytic philosophy, i.e. the philosophy of natural language (Strawson) and the philosophy of ideal language (Russell). In consequence, the aim of this paper is to sketch the principal features of the two traditions and to indicate their influence on the argument. In the first paragraph I discuss Russell’s theory of descriptions and present it as a result of dramatic changes that he had made in his philosophy before he finally presented them in On Denoting in 1905. The second paragraph deals with the two traditions within analytic philosophy after the linguistic turn and underlines the role of Strawson in the philosophy of natural language. In the third paragraph I analyze in detail Strawson’s arguments against the theory of descriptions and I focus on some details that are usually omitted in standard presentations. The fourth paragraph discusses Russell’s response to Strawson’s objections, i.e. the counter-arguments formulated from the standpoint of philosophy of ideal language. I end with some suggestions about how to reconcile both approaches.