The aim of this paper is to present Patočka’s reception of Ingarden‘s concept of a lit­erary work of art, both with respect to Patočka‘s own philosophy of literature, and with regard to a development Patočka’s critical approach to the Ingarden’s theory of literary works. The possible objections against Ingarden‘s theory, which primarily lie in criti­cism of Ingarden‘s structuralist or formalistic approach to the search for the essence of a literary work, are designed on the basis of relevant notes in Patočka‘s professional studies. That argument is interpreted as a comparation with Patočka’s conception of philosophy of literature.

The concept of order has its great history in the european development from the presocratics over Aurelius Augustinus until H. Driesch and H. Krings, who in the year 1941 publicates his book Ordo. In our country payed attention to the concept of order and ordering all the life long first of all the in Brno and Olomouc teaching J. L. Fischer (1894–1973). The idea of order was one of the pilar of his synthetic philosophy, which had to solve the problems of modern society better as the marxism. At the same time as the laicistique Fischer waged the instalment of a valuable order a clean-cut catholic group concentrate about the revue Řád. The matter for both poles was to put an end to the reign of capitalism, but they were not able to understand one another for the differ­ence of their beliefs, resp.faithes. The article will among others show the possibility how to conceive both the approaches in the conception of W. C. Smith, who teaches, that the genuine faith has few in common with a so called belief. The article sees in the exploit­ing of this conception the possibility how to reconcile both the poles and contribute to the renewal of european civilisation. This task may be solved above all on the universi­ties in Brno and Olomouc.

Presented article puts mind to thinking of „last Roman and first scholastics“ Anicius Boethius, which is mainly known by his Consolation of Philosophy. This article focus on different side of Boethius, e.g. his scientific effort to translate greek terms to latin, create new terminology and syntetise philosophical diffusion of his contemporary phi­losophers by exact methodology. His language uses art and logic togather.Boethius unified by his language contradictory philosophical schools – Plato, Aristo­tle, pythagoreism, neoplatonism and christian philosophy. He formalized scientific field according to arithmetical research as a part of artes liberales. He reformed artes lib­erales to christian world and unified scientic research by exact mathematical methods. He called his way as quadrivium (e.g. four ways) as a part of Seven liberal arts (lat. Septem artes liberales). Quadrivium consisted from arithmetics, geometry, astronomy and music. These „four ways to wisdom“ were for Boethius only true method to explore understandable universum (lat. naturalia). He considered scientific language to same importance as scientific research. Boethius emphasized that all scientific theory must be understandable. Despite of logic coherency Boethius use artistic expressions.This article points out the difficulties of up-to-date science, which is sometimes lim­ited by language. Article shows, that inspiration is right by hand in history of science. In history stayed european philosophers in similar role as today. That is why Boethius is inspiring, he used new translations, and new language. He used the formal logic and art togather.

The article deals with some of the epistemological consequences which had the use of optical devices in the 17th century. As a illustrative framework of these consequences, I use the famous novel Gulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift which present a literary and imaginative context for some of the consequences. In the first part, I try to outline the reasons of unthinkability of optical devices in the Greek natural philosophy. Then I pres­ent the anthropological discovery of human unimportance in the universe brought about by telescopical observation of the sky. The second part deals with the Cartesian theory of perception and its importance for the understanding of microscopical observation. The result of the microscopical experience was a bitter detection of non-privileged status of human perception of the world. In the third part, it is outlined that modern optical de­vices were interpreted by early modern scientists (and consequently by Swift) as means showing epistemological inaccesibility of the very substance of nature. However, the epistemological reluctance of the early modern science was compensated by the idea of progress. Swift who stood at the side of anciens in the famous querelle did not consider the idea of scientific progress as a persuasive solution although he could not refuse the new scientific worldview. Eventually, he could only dream about a better pristine utopi­an world of eternal wisdom.

The whole of bioethical problems forms the most progressive part of the present ethical discourse. The concept of the ethics of social consequences and evolutionary ontology represents in this area a huge potential in the development of all three pillars of bioethics (medical and nursing ethics, environmental ethics and “animal ethics“). At present the environmental ethics obviously stagnates a little bit, however, at the same time it is possible to process successfully the critical and theoretical (methodological) analysis of its present forms as an important incentive for its further possible develop­ment. Concept of s.c.evolutional ontology yields original point of viev to the relation between nature and culture. It´s potentially inspirating for the axiology and environ­mental ethics too.

Isaiah Berlin introduces two concepts of liberty and this distinction of liberty al­though is on the one side relevant and important but on the other problematic and ques­tionable. Berlin’s distinction points out that these concepts of the positive and negative liberty are really antagonistic. There are two points of view; one is the point of a human nature or man as individual and the second is the point of a human society. The main purpose of our article is to answer the question which of these concepts is more suita­ble from the human nature or human society point of view. Berlin’s conclusion is that the negative liberty more reflects the human nature and is a truer human ideal than the positive concept of liberty with the goals of those who seek after a better society. But contrary to Berlin we want to prove that this result is not so evident because each one of these concepts implicitly contains some problematic difficulties which cannot be so simply overcome by Berlin’s dichotomy. For this reason the result of our analysis is a scale of liberty between its two poles.

Phenomenology of Spirit, Heidegger says, is the first part of the system of science that was planned by Hegel. Another of its titles is called: Science of the Experience of Consciousness. By the science (Wissenschaft) is meant philosophy, understood as a science of the experience of consciousness, which means an experience that the consciousness makes with itself. According to Hegel, philosophy is attempting to get an absolute knowledge, the most general knowledge that is possible to achieve. And meanwhile for Hegel, in his Phenomenology of Spirit, the relationship to the human being, as a subject that is able to get an absolute knowledge and to achieve the self-consciousness, is the most important, Heidegger prefers in Hegel´s Phenomenology of Spirit Being itself with its relationship to beings as he understood it. For Heidegger all of the problems from the Phenomenology of Spirit represent nothing less than an articulation of the endless Being compared to the variety of temporal beings.

The aim of this paper is to describe Whitehead’s specific interpretation of the originally Plato’s concept of the “receptacle” (hypodoché). Whitehead, in line with his own process philosophy, understands Plato’s concept of the “receptacle” as a personal unity that, in its structural character, expresses the general principle that determines the constitution of the whole of our reality. The author of this paper begins by briefly describing Plato’s concept of hypodoché. The author goes on to present Whitehead’s specific interpretation of this concept, which allows the author to elaborate the potential parallels between Whitehead’s interpretation of hypodoché and his concept of “eternal objects”. Finally, the author attempts to find the answer to a fundamental philosophical question: what in reality corresponds to Whitehead’s concept of “eternal objects”. The author suggests that a possible answer may be found in the General Systems Theory of Ludwig von Bertalanffy.

This article is dealing with the meaning of the eternal recurrence and the reason of time in philosophical work of Ladislav Klíma. Klíma’s understanding of eternal recurrence contains logical inconsistencies which are being analysed. The conditions established by Klíma do not agree with results which are concluded. Nevertheless, the point of Klíma’s relation to time is more existential and the logic analysis is not proportional to the sense of so called „egosolism“. Klíma’s literary image of time which is shown as a legless beggar is established to the previous ideas of eternal recurrence analyses, too. Its role in the specific confession of Klíma’s philosophy is explained as well.

In this paper, I present and analyze the key part of the discussion that arose between the authors inspired by psychological situationism and the advocates of the concept of moral character that appears in the Aristotelian thought tradition. At the heart of this discussion is the question of whether this concept remains adequate despite recent findings of social and cognitive psychology. Whether it represents a significant determinant of behavior, withstanding various factors such as social pressure, momentary mental settings or even just something quite simple like bad weather. Its significance then must be high enough for it to be meaningful to devote valuable resources to its cultivation in practice.

Czech philosopher Albína Dratvová (1892–1969) is especially remembered for her work in philosophy of natural science and as an author of a number of secondary school textbooks in philosophy and logic. An important part of her intellectual legacy consists of her anthropological-ethical works, most importantly the work Duše dnešní ženy (On the Soul of the Contemporary Woman). The author proceeds from her personal experience and focuses on the role and function of the mental activities of women in new conditions and forms of women’s activity. The subtle analysis of the mental situation of women also brings a challenge and directions for finding the meaning of life.

Ve svém příspěvku stručně shrnu obsah knihy Stevena Pinkera The better angels of our nature: Why violence has declined a podrobím Pinkerovu analýzu vývoje násilí v lidských dějinách kritice. Dosavadní kritika tohoto díla ukazuje nejen na to, že Pinkerův popis jednotlivých historických období se zdá být na některých místech tendenční, ale že jeho obecná teze o zvyšující se mírumilovnosti společnosti není ze statistického hlediska prokázána. Připojím také vlastní kritiku Pinkerem identifikovaných psychologických změn, které podle jeho názoru vedly k bezprecedentní mírumilovnosti současného člověka. Představím argumenty, které zpochybňují buď to, že tyto psychologické změny skutečně probíhají (proměna směrem k femininním hodnotám péče a k větším empatickým schopnostem), nebo že tyto proměny souvisejí s úbytkem násilí (přechod k utilitaristické morálce a k abstraktnímu myšlení).

Great divergence (i.e. why Europe progressed faster than anyone else) has an important place in civilization studies as well as political and ethical ramifications. Ferguson’s Civilization: The West and the Rest solves this problem by positing six key advantages of the West. This article aims to show that this approach is not only openly political and problematic in terms of internal consistency, but also unsupported by contemporary historical science.

The paper deals with Voltaire’s and Rousseau’s views on the character of human nature. The author compares their perspectives in the polemic related to the Lisbon earthquake in 1755. Rousseau reacts to Voltaire’s poem devoted to the catastrophe in his Letter on Providence where he criticizes Voltaire’s refusal of optimistic position and determines human neglecting of natural conditions as the main cause of Lisbon tragedy. In general Rousseau argues in favor of Providence and stresses the importance of his personal belief in providential guidance.

This article presents a few reflections on wisdom, sapientia, as seen by Roger Bacon. Roger Bacon (1214‒1292), a famous Franciscan and Aristotelian physicist known for his experimental science, was deeply engaged in alchemy, theology, ethics and philosophy. Bacon’s large works Opus maius, Opus minus, Opus tertium, designated for pope Clement IV, and other scriptures as Compendium studii philosophiae provide a sufficient base for studying his concept of wisdom, sapientia. Bacon frequently uses the term sapientia as a synonym for philosophia both having its origin from God. Bacon, influenced by Josephus Flavius, Saint Augustine and the author of Pseudo-Aristotelian Secretum secretorum, was preoccupied with the level of wisdom in the Latin culture of 13th century. Unlike other cultures of wisdom – the Jews, the Greeks, the Arabians – Bacon was convinced that the Latini lacked books and, above all, the true comprehension of original texts. Therefore, he ardently recommended studying foreign languages, which he calls “the first entrance to wisdom”. The reasons for studying languages are described and enumerated e.g. in the Compendium studii philosophiae. Wisdom according to Bacon is a kind of mutually connected knowledge, sapientia totalis, bearing resemblance to science.

This article concerns the relationship between Nietzsche‘s concept of Master and Slave morality, and his tragic thinking. I suggest that the roots of the former can be traced back to Nietzsche‘s early period, specifically to the concepts of the Aryan and Semitic sin. My aim is to show that in his thinking, Nietzsche draws a sharp distinction between the moral (which he condemns) and the tragic (which he affirms) understanding of life. After a brief explanation of these two concepts, I turn my attention to Nietzsche‘s critique of Christianity. In his view, Christianity is the ultimate anti-tragic view of the world and as such, he considers it the deepest and most dangerous attempt at a moral interpretation of life.

This article is a sequel to an article of the same name published in the 1st number of Studia philosophica 59/2012, pp. 71–85. The list of Fischer´s works is supplemented with his magazine articles (notably in Svobodné noviny) and brochures focusing on the contemporary political events in the country ((Politika a stranictví and Únor 1948. Slovo k vychovatelům). Great attention is paid to Fischer´s book Tři stupně. Filosofický vějíř (1948), in which the author summarizes the stages of his development towards his structural philosophy, and suggests its further refinements. Along with an overview of Fischer´s lectures at Palacký University in Olomouc, the article aims at revealing the way that J. L. Fischer participated in the philosophical life and the overall development of the national and state community of the years 1945–1948.

E. Rádl along with the protestant theologian J. L. Hromádka were the initiators and co-editors as well as prolific contributors to the philosophical and theological Christian Review. When Consolation from Philosophy, Rádl’s philosophical testament, was pub­lished in 1946, a number of evangelic authors reviewed the work in Christian Review: the theologian Amedeo Molnár, the historian Otakar Odložilík, and the philosopher Božena Komárková. Molnár focused on Rádl’s philosophy of history and compared it to the conception of the Swiss religious socialist and theologian Leonhard Ragaz. Otakar Odložilík commented on Rádl’s view of the future of human scholarship and intelligence and found marked resonance with the views of Rádl’s contemporary, the Dutch historian Johan Huizing. Komárková’s critical notes dealt with the metaphysical and moral problems contained in Rádl’s book. She praised Rádl’s success in revealing questions concerning the roots of human civilizations, shattering existing certainties and giving impetus for their new analysis.