ОСВІТНІ ТРАНСФОРМАЦІЇ ТА ЇХНІ ДОМІНАНТИ: МІЖ ДИНАМІКОЮ ТА СТРУКТУРОЮ ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНОСТІ

This article discusses meta-pedagogical transformation contexts in the areas of human actions and the course of human life from the perspectives of hermeneutics, critical reflection, psychoanalysis, anthropology, and the project of “applied humanities.” The following problems are addressed: 1) shifts of the dominant among factors participating in professional processes and practices, such as dialogue, the rationality of actions, the understanding of tradition, freedom, changes, and the ideal of the space of actions; 2) transversality, structural duality, and oscillations around dilemmas of action and dominants in psychosocial development; 3) traps, limitations, and gaps in traditional approaches to relations between factors in a person’s identity transformation; losing track of discontinuities and internal tensions; 4) the anti-positivist breakthrough in considering the explanations of processes and the trifold “explosion effect” in transformations of agents’ emotive-cognitive representations, including their auto-transformations and interactive alliance in actions; 5) Alternative approaches to the conceptualizations presented in this article. The paper indicates new meaning of the term "theory" from the point of view of "antipositivistic turnover", including theories in pedagogy, sociology and philosophical pragmatic conceptions.У тексті обговорюються трансформаційні метапедагогічні контексти з використанням герменевтики, критичної рефлексії, психоаналізу, антропології та проєкту "прикладних гуманітарних наук". Проблематика: (1) зміщення домінанти серед чинників професійних процесів і практик, таких як: діалогу, раціональності дії, розуміння традиції, свободи, змін, ідеалу простору дії; (2) трансверсальність, структурна дуальність та коливання навколо дилем дії та домінант психосоціального розвитку; (3) пастки, обмеження та прогалини традиційних описів взаємин між агентами у трансформації людської ідентичності, втрата розривів та внутрішніх напружень; (4) антипозитивістський прорив у поясненні процесів і троп "вибухового ефекту" у трансформаціях емоційно-когнітивних репрезентацій існуючих суб\u27єктів, включаючи їх самотрансформацію та інтерактивний альянс у дії; (5) інші приклади зазначеної концептуалізації. Автор вказує на нове значення терміна "теорія" з позицій "антипозитивістського повороту", у т. ч. теорій у педагогіці, соціології та філософсько-прагматичних концепціях

Autorytet i wartości u stóp

Lech WitkowskiAuthority and Values at One’s FeetThe author attempts to summarize his own discussions from previous books devoted to the category of authority in social practice, symbolic culture, and in the history of humanities and social sciences. He emphasizes the idea of treating every place that can implement the reference to authorities as being at every man’s feet, at hand. Such perspective invalidates the view of authority in terms of a highly dominating point of reference, or a guarantee of certainty which relieves us from the effort of our own investigations, and points out the illusion of treating authority only in terms of a distanced repetition of erudite associations. What matters is the value of a real encounter with the life-giving symbolic contents which is easily neglected instead of being carefully considered. It is absolutely crucial to liberate education and spiritual development from the ritualization of pretence, and the lack of care for being rooted in culture in terms of symbolic memory. The author cites examples of Paul Ricoeur’s experiences as a dean during the student revolt, Joseph Chałasiński’s analysis of the “intelligentsia ghetto” and its relation to the authority, as well as specific approaches to Andrew Kiev’s masterpieces. Czeslaw Milosz, and Martin Heidegger turn out to have been crucial for the understanding of authority for the author of the article.Lech WitkowskiAuthority and Values at One’s FeetThe author attempts to summarize his own discussions from previous books devoted to the category of authority in social practice, symbolic culture, and in the history of humanities and social sciences. He emphasizes the idea of treating every place that can implement the reference to authorities as being at every man’s feet, at hand. Such perspective invalidates the view of authority in terms of a highly dominating point of reference, or a guarantee of certainty which relieves us from the effort of our own investigations, and points out the illusion of treating authority only in terms of a distanced repetition of erudite associations. What matters is the value of a real encounter with the life-giving symbolic contents which is easily neglected instead of being carefully considered. It is absolutely crucial to liberate education and spiritual development from the ritualization of pretence, and the lack of care for being rooted in culture in terms of symbolic memory. The author cites examples of Paul Ricoeur’s experiences as a dean during the student revolt, Joseph Chałasiński’s analysis of the “intelligentsia ghetto” and its relation to the authority, as well as specific approaches to Andrew Kiev’s masterpieces. Czeslaw Milosz, and Martin Heidegger turn out to have been crucial for the understanding of authority for the author of the article

Humanistic Challenges in the (In)Balance of Processes and Social Practices (A Panorama of Tropes of Duality / Dual-process Theory)

The article discusses the contemporary conflict over “meta-patterns” in the humanities. Aside from the introduction, it consists of seven sections. First, the author presents and objects to the dominant visions of cognitive strategies in contemporary humanities, which are defective when analyzing the complexity of phenomena and processes. Secondly, they are named and questioned as illusions about excellence in the dominant modes of the institutionalization of science. Thirdly, the author discusses examples pertaining to the increasing complexity of phenomena as a humanistic challenge. Fourthly, he refers to the concept of dual processes in culture and social practice. The fifth section illustrates the recurring problem of imbalance in the structure of such processes and practices, also highlighting the importance of an ecological approach, together with its new understanding of the humanities. The sixth section of the article examines the tension between the institutionalization and the intellectualization of discourse, for the sake of uniting them into one process. Finally, instead of a conclusion, in the seventh part the author offers some emphasis in the form of a message for the future in the postulated strategy of development and self-education.Tekst zajmuje się współczesnym sporem w humanistyce o „metawzorce”. Składa się, poza wstępem, z siedmiu bloków rozważań. Po pierwsze, autor określa i zgłasza sprzeciw wobec dominujących wizji strategii poznawczej w humanistyce współczesnej, jako ułomnych wobec złożoności zjawisk i procesów. Po drugie, są nazwane i zakwestionowane jako iluzje przekonania dotyczące doskonałości w dominujących trybach instytucjonalizacji nauki. Po trzecie, omówione zostają przykłady narastania złożoności zjawisk jako wyzwania humanistycznego. Po czwarte, mówi się o pojęciu podwójnych (dual) (dwoistych) procesów w kulturze i praktyce społecznej. Piąty człon rozważań stanowi ilustrację problematyki powracającego niezrównoważenia w strukturze takich procesów i praktyk, akcentując także wagę podejścia ekologicznego z jego nowym pojmowaniem w humanistyce. Szósta część tekstu omawia napięcia między instytucjonalizacją i intelektualizacją dyskursu, w trosce o ich zespalanie w jeden proces. Wreszcie po siódme, zamiast zakończenia autor czyni akcenty w formie posłania dla przyszłości w postulowanej strategii rozwoju i samokształcenia

Transformacje i ich dominanty – między dynamiką i strukturą procesualności

This article discusses meta-pedagogical transformation contexts in the areas of human actions and the course of human life from the perspectives of hermeneutics, critical reflection, psychoanalysis, anthropology, and the project of “applied humanities.” The following problems are addressed: 1) Shifts of the dominant among factors participating in professional processes and practices, such as dialogue, the rationality of actions, the understanding of tradition, freedom, changes, and the ideal of the space of actions; 2) Transversality, structural duality, and oscillations around dilemmas of action and dominants in psychosocial development; 3) Traps, limitations, and gaps in traditional approaches to relations between factors in a person’s identity transformation; losing track of discontinuities and internal tensions; 4) The anti-positivist breakthrough in considering the explanations of processes and the trifold “explosion effect” in transformations of agents’ emotive-cognitive representations, including their auto-transformations and interactive alliance in actions; 5) Alternative approaches to the conceptualizations presented in this article.W tekście metapedagogiczne konteksty transformacyjne w przestrzeniach działań i losów ludzkich omówiono z wykorzystaniem hermeneutyki, refleksji krytycznej, psychoanalizy, antropologii i projektu „humanistyki stosowanej”. Poruszono następujące problemy: 1) przemieszczanie dominanty wśród czynników w procesach i praktykach zawodowych, takich jak: dialog, racjonalność działań, rozumienie tradycji, wolności, zmiany, ideału przestrzeni działania; 2) transwersalność, dwoistość strukturalna i oscylacje wokół dylematów działania i dominant w rozwoju psychospołecznym; 3) pułapki, ograniczenia i luki w tradycyjnych ujęciach relacji między czynnikami w transformacji tożsamościowej człowieka, gubiące nieciągłości i napięcia wewnętrzne; 4) przełom antypozytywistyczny w rozumiejącym wyjaśnianiu procesów oraz troisty „efekt wybuchowy” w transformacjach reprezentacji emocjonalno-poznawczej podmiotów działających, w tym ich autotransformacji i przymierza interakcyjnego w działaniu; 5) inne ujęcia wskazanej konceptualizacji

O nowym odczytaniu Floriana Znanieckiego. Otwarcie debaty nad książką Uroszczenia i transaktualność w humanistyce. Florian Znaniecki: dziedzictwo idei i jego pęknięcia na posiedzeniu Towarzystwa im. Floriana Znanieckiego

The text is a transcription of the author’s presentation discussing theses of his book Uroszczenia i transaktualność w humanistyce. Florian Znaniecki: dziedzictwo idei i jego pęknięcia (Impuls, Cracow 2022). The author emphasizes the polemic character of his conclusions as confronted with the Polish reception of Znaniecki among sociologists, pedagogists, philosophers and psychologists.The text is a transcription of the author’s presentation discussing theses of his book Uroszczenia i transaktualność w humanistyce. Florian Znaniecki: dziedzictwo idei i jego pęknięcia (Impuls, Cracow 2022). The author emphasizes the polemic character of his conclusions as confronted with the Polish reception of Znaniecki among sociologists, pedagogists, philosophers and psychologists

Helena Radlińska’s “Great Generation” (With an Intergenerational Perspective in the Background)

The author begins with a reflection on some of the generational differences among the intellectual elites in independent Poland. Next, he discusses – perceived as a “complete attitude” – the ten missions undertaken in Polish pedagogy by Radlińska’s Great Generation. He points to the clash of different types of institutionalization represented by different generational circles. The examples of H. Radlińska and F. Znaniecki are highlighted both in the aspect of what connects and differentiates them, as well as how these differences can be overcome by offering a synthesis of how their generation referred to historical challenges. Finally, the author reflects on their intellectual quality and the obstacles they faced in the discussed generational experience.W artykule autor najpierw czyni uwagi o różnicach pokoleniowych wśród elity intelektualnej w Polsce niepodległej. Następnie omawia, traktowaną jako „postawa kompletna” – dziesięć zadań Wielkiego Pokolenia Radlińskiej w pedagogice polskiej. Dalej wskazuje na zderzenie odmiennych instytucjonalizacji odrębnych tożsamości kręgów pokoleniowych. Wyróżnione zostają przykłady H. Radlińskiej i F. Znanieckiego, w kwestii tego, co ich łączy i co dzieli, i jak różnice te da się przezwyciężyć w próbie syntezy ich horyzontu pokoleniowego odniesienia do wyzwań historycznych. Ostatecznie wskazuje się na wartości intelektualne i ich przeszkody wdrożeniowe dotyczące omówionego doświadczenia pokoleniowego

Jaka pedagogika krytyczna jest (nie)możliwa w Polsce i dlaczego? (Esej metakrytyczny z Henrym A. Giroux w tle)

The text undertakes the problematics situated between modernity and tradition regarding the reception of H.A. Giroux’s works in Poland, in a view of furthering the study of pedagogy and educational praxis. First, the author outlines the beginnings of openness towards critical pedagogy. What is underscored here is the 1980s’ main inspiration drawn from the resistance paradigm. Then, the author proceeds to the current state of Giroux’s reception in Poland. He illustrates differences among particular examples and levels of the said reception of Giroux’s pedagogy and of the scholar’s theoretical background. The emphasized disputes pertain especially to transcending metaphysics and relativism as a challenge faced by hermeneutical criticism and critical hermeneutics. Additionally, the “critical” horizon of the main handbook of pedagogy used in Polish universities is discussed. The author point to the wasteful efforts at instigating the breakthrough in the reception of critical pedagogy and he exemplifies them by an instance of misbegotten analysis of the allegedly delayed critical pedagogy of work. As a particularly positive example the author presents a new effort at developing critical hermeneutics (and radical praxis) for pedagogy by Andrzej Wierciński. In the concluding part written “in lieuof conclusions,” four lists of critical problems’ dislocations are provided; the problems are both convergent and related to one another, thereby redefining current research objectives and pertain to practical applications in educational praxis.The text undertakes the problematics situated between modernity and tradition regarding the reception of H.A. Giroux’s works in Poland, in a view of furthering the study of pedagogy and educational praxis. First, the author outlines the beginnings of openness towards critical pedagogy. What is underscored here is the 1980s’ main inspiration drawn from the resistance paradigm. Then, the author proceeds to the current state of Giroux’s reception in Poland. He illustrates differences among particular examples and levels of the said reception of Giroux’s pedagogy and of the scholar’s theoretical background. The emphasized disputes pertain especially to transcending metaphysics and relativism as a challenge faced by hermeneutical criticism and critical hermeneutics. Additionally, the “critical” horizon of the main handbook of pedagogy used in Polish universities is discussed. The author point to the wasteful efforts at instigating the breakthrough in the reception of critical pedagogy and he exemplifies them by an instance of misbegotten analysis of the allegedly delayed critical pedagogy of work. As a particularly positive example the author presents a new effort at developing critical hermeneutics (and radical praxis) for pedagogy by Andrzej Wierciński. In the concluding part written “in lieuof conclusions,” four lists of critical problems’ dislocations are provided; the problems are both convergent and related to one another, thereby redefining current research objectives and pertain to practical applications in educational praxis

Perspektywa czytania Floriana Znanieckiego jako klasyka(z Paulem Tillichem w tle)

In the introduction the author explains his reference to the „duality turnover” as a joint strategy discovered in both figures from the title. Then a paradox of the position of classics in humanities is discussed with argument for a radical difference between institutionalization of a discourse and its wider intellectual value and applicative validity. Then the author discusses sharpened threads of Znaniecki’s attitude. There are showed also the sources of cognitive omissions.  Then some references to Tillich follow, before the conclusive remarks and bibliography. Znaniecki is valued as important beyond sociology and Tillich appreciated beyond theology, both viewed as great humanists, valuable for humanities today.Autor rozpoczyna od wyjaśnienia terminu „przełom dwoistości” jako wspólnej strategii, odkrytej u obu postaci wymienionych w tytule. Następnie omawia paradoks pozycji klasyków w naukach humanistycznych, z argumentacją za radykalną różnicą między instytucjonalizacją dyskursu a jego szerszą wartością intelektualną i przydatnością aplikacyjną. Ponadto, analizuje również zaostrzone wątki postawy Znanieckiego oraz przedstawia źródła poznawczych przeoczeń. W dalszej części pojawiają się odniesienia do Tillicha, poprzedzające uwagi końcowe i bibliografię. Znaniecki jest ceniony poza socjologią, a Tillich doceniany poza teologią; obaj są postrzegani jako wielcy humaniści, cenni dla dzisiejszych nauk humanistycznych

Między tragizmem, śmietnikiem i pychą. Próba odpowiedzi moim Znakomitym Polemistom

Lech WitkowskiBetween Tragicality, the Garbage Dump and Hubris.An Attempt at a Response to my Eminent PolemicistsAppreciating the efforts taken by the eminent critics from the younger generation in relation to his own approach to the category of the authority, the author is trying to dispel some doubts and highlight the differences in regard to the approaches at times attributed to him. He points to the need for a new universalism of the “greatness of spirit”, while admitting to a different understanding of conservatism from the one associated with the declaration of concern for the life-giving nature of the symbolic heritage for the present. The author, following in the footsteps of Bakhtin’s semiotics of culture, advocates the praise of the other’s speech: beyond elitism and barbarism. He warns that when one points to a diagnosis of an approaching abyss, the relation between tradition and modernity looks more worrying than in the eyes of those who notice only progress in the new dominant forms of attitudes towards culture. He does not want to be seen as a “colorful bird,” filled with nostalgia for the past grandeur, governance and clarity of the hierarchy of meanings, both beautiful and pathetic. He also tries to point out that he is familiar with the symptoms of real human tragedy in the life of society and the barbaric attitudes of “amoeba” in the culture, which is reflected in a reference to the quality of living in Hölderlin’s “destitute time.” Seeing the position of authority at the foot of the often arrogant consumers of culture, the author points to the beneficial stooping in the culture for the significant bits which open our eyes and give the possibility of self-expression. The author proposes a vision of education as a battle for the common man for the sake of his/her rooting in culture and the care of one’s own humanity beyond the mass consumer attitudes, despite unilateral gestures of rage and hostility or carnivalisation of irresponsibility related to individual claims without any contact with those meanings that are able to make one think.Lech WitkowskiBetween Tragicality, the Garbage Dump and Hubris. An Attempt at a Response to my Eminent Polemicists Appreciating the efforts taken by the eminent critics from the younger generation in relation to his own approach to the category of the authority, the author is trying to dispel some doubts and highlight the differences in regard to the approaches at times attributed to him. He points to the need for a new universalism of the “greatness of spirit”, while admitting to a different understanding of conservatism from the one associated with the declaration of concern for the life-giving nature of the symbolic heritage for the present. The author, following in the footsteps of Bakhtin’s semiotics of culture, advocates the praise of the other’s speech: beyond elitism and barbarism. He warns that when one points to a diagnosis of an approaching abyss, the relation between tradition and modernity looks more worrying than in the eyes of those who notice only progress in the new dominant forms of attitudes towards culture. He does not want to be seen as a “colorful bird,” filled with nostalgia for the past grandeur, governance and clarity of the hierarchy of meanings, both beautiful and pathetic. He also tries to point out that he is familiar with the symptoms of real human tragedy in the life of society and the barbaric attitudes of “amoeba” in the culture, which is reflected in a reference to the quality of living in Hölderlin’s “destitute time.” Seeing the position of authority at the foot of the often arrogant consumers of culture, the author points to the beneficial stooping in the culture for the significant bits which open our eyes and give the possibility of self-expression. The author proposes a vision of education as a battle for the common man for the sake of his/her rooting in culture and the care of one’s own humanity beyond the mass consumer attitudes, despite unilateral gestures of rage and hostility or carnivalisation of irresponsibility related to individual claims without any contact with those meanings that are able to make one think

Przełomowe znaczenie Floriana Znanieckiego dla humanistyki (słowo na otwarcie debaty o mojej książce Uroszczenia i transaktualność w humanistyce)

At the beginning of this transcript of the online debate, the author thanks some initiators and participants of the preliminary meeting. Then he confesses that his own attitude towards the book on Znaniecki needs a continuation. Next he mentions the leading analytical ideas of his intellectual approach. He identifies some theoretical challenges associated with such disciplines as philosophy, sociology, pedagogy and social psychology. The author also recalls the basic strategic ideas contained in Znaniecki’s concepts. He suggests the development of radically innovative emphases in this classic achievement and their application. The author refers to his articles written after the book was published, treating this sequence as a paradoxical order of preparation for further, detailed studies.At the beginning of this transcript of the online debate, the author thanks some initiators and participants of the preliminary meeting. Then he confesses that his own attitude towards the book on Znaniecki needs a continuation. Next he mentions the leading analytical ideas of his intellectual approach. He identifies some theoretical challenges associated with such disciplines as philosophy, sociology, pedagogy and social psychology. The author also recalls the basic strategic ideas contained in Znaniecki’s concepts. He suggests the development of radically innovative emphases in this classic achievement and their application. The author refers to his articles written after the book was published, treating this sequence as a paradoxical order of preparation for further, detailed studies