Marek J. Siemek’s idea of the transcendental social philosophy seems paradoxical, because it aspires to combine the allegedly “non-historical” and “timeless” transcendental sphere with the social and historical dimension. But the uniqueness of Siemek as a philosopher consists precisely in being Fichtean as well as Hegelian. Siemek’s philosophy is an undertaking to reconstruct the field of rationality in its social and historical dimension. The leading question of this philosophy is not if history is rational, but how it is possible for the rationality to be historical. Siemek seems to maintain, that the noninstrumental rationality has it’s own history: it is a history of self-de-instrumentalization of the initial one-sided instrumental reason. Historical process can be seen as a vehicle of rationality, although not always and necessary rational itself. For Siemek, as well as for Hegel, the historical contradiction is a contradiction of the thing itself, not a development scheme imposed on the history by theoretician from his allegedly external position. On one side: there is no history without the rational interpretation of history. On the other side: the interpretation itself is a part of historical process.

I can’t say that I resent the Germans, nor that I expect or demand anything from them. I would only like them to know what they have done to me. They have destroyed my childhood and ruined my eight-year-old imagination, leaving only a pile of rubble, heap of corpses, great cesspool—gigantic hole filled with black blood. (K 53)

This paper defines a quantitative model of civilization wisdom potential in terms of its wisdom capacity potential and wisdom activity potential. Four minds such as the Basic, Whole, Global, and Universal ones are defined and their wisdom potential is assessed for eight particular civilizations, such as Western, Eastern, Japanese, Chinese, Hindu, Islamic, Buddhist, and African. In conclusion the study states that civilization wisdom should be applied in almost every facet of civilization and its future depends on civilization wisdom.

Under the influence of today’s post-modern human sciences and their relativistic, skepticism-imbued theories the universalism idea, until recently the philosophical driving-force behind efforts to build a global human community based on universal principles of rationality, has lost much of its attractiveness to pluralism. However, despite the recognition that human rationality expresses itself in many different ways, strivings towards a universal human community have by no means ceased. Some take the form of political projects, others are more spontaneous and take place beyond both politics and philosophy. The present reflections on these strivings’ success chances go out from ideas formulated by Eugeniusz Górski in his study Civil Society, Pluralism and Universalism(Washington DC, Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2007).

This article is a speculative review of psychology’s approach to the cultural and civilizational determinants of the development of human identity. It discusses the relation between human freedom and necessity as it is determined by culture and its alternative suggestions concerning normative human existence. As his point of departure the author adopted Feliks Koneczny’s quincunx philosophy of history together with its five basic categories of existence. One can try to transpose these categories into the factors which constitute human intra-psychic space and also into measures of description of the mechanics of human behavior. Attention is drawn to the fact that, in this context, the axiological shortcomings of psychology are exposed, especially the deliberate refusal to evaluate behavior in terms of good and evil or the exclusion of ethics, moral obligations, conscience and responsibility from psychological discourse.

This paper investigates the reason why humans developed a brain and mind and the latter’s mental processes employed in the search for wisdom. The Anthropological and Cognitive Approaches are applied in defining major cybernetic anatomies of a brain and mind. The INFOCO Systems are defined and applied in defining the stage-oriented development of humans’ kinds. A concept and evolution of a mind is defined too and eight minds are recognized which are grouped in four clusters: Basic, Whole, Global, and Universal Minds. Their development in particular civilizations is analyzed and a model of wisdom’s bifurcation is presented.

From the perspective of Marek J. Siemek’s theory of modernity, one of the most important problem is to include conflicts into institutional framework of the modern society. He reinterprets Hegel’s dialectics of the struggle for recognition by conceptual tools of Hobbes and Marx in order to uncover hidden assumptions and conditions of possibility of the social rationality. For Siemek, law as purely formal, autopoetic social system or social subject (intersubjective automaton), which produces individual subjects (persona in the sense of Roman law), is the first of the conditions of possibility of modernity. The second one is the convergence of formal and material presuppositions (such as recognition and labor) of law—or, speaking generally—the convergence of form and content of the social reason. Form and content, facticity and normativity, instrumentality and communicativity (or teleology) are aspects of the process of rationalization andof the only one reason, self-generating in the history. So for Siemek, the Hegelian model of the struggle for recognition gains its theoretical power only when it is interpreted from the perspective of economical, technical and legal rationalization of modernity. Only such perspective is able to construct “the transcendental social philosophy” which starts from critique of “the non-instrumental reason”.

In the paper I try to define some basic ideas and sketch a style of Marek Siemek’s epistemological reflection and its influence on the notion of do called “meaning of history”. I referee some elements of his interpretation of Kant and Hegel as a background to paradox of “meaning of the history”—the paradox of its necessary transcendence and immanence, the contradiction between a history as an eschatology, and history as a “project”, a dialectic of sense and non-sense. The conclusion is following: the “history” for Siemek is the becoming of self-sufficiency of the “modern spirit” and therefore a tragicomedy in the Hegelian sense. It excludes any transcendent point of view or any utopia.

The author of this text introduces to Kazimierz Dąbrowski’s views on the subject of national character as a category describing the structure and character traits of individual and collective identity. The Polish psychiatrist and existential psychotherapist K. Dąbrowski (1902–1980) distinguishes positive and negative traits of the „national character” of Poles, based on a typology of characters by Ernst Kretschmer and his own theory of psychical over-excitability types. My text verifies the introduced psychological arguments with the concept of “humanity”, finding that the concept of „national character” can be included into the complex or the ego defense mechanisms.

The article presents the processes of public discourse construction and dynamics. On the national level, symbolic processes are related to the position of the country in the international environment. Being a collective political actor on the discursive scene, the country is involved in legitimation mechanisms in the interaction stream with other political actors, i.e. its foreign counterparts. Upon intentions to enter the mainstream European culture after the transition period, Spain became discursively involved in the mutual legitimation procedures involving a number of political partners and based on the requirement of institutional isomorphism. Consistently presented within the propitious approach of new institutionalism on the corporate level (e.g. Meyer and Rowan 2006), it is advanced herein on the national level of Spanish discursive policies.

Christianization of Polish territories, according to the Western rite, incorporated these lands into the Western European civilization and emerging there political and legal doctrines, which were used in creating Polish political-legal thought. At the time of establishing social bonds and structures of the state, the political elite came into being and the Polish political thought developed. It corresponded with the main political thought and ideas of the West, but the Polish ideas displayed characteristics, necessary for protecting the Polish raison d’etat. Development of political thought, original and particular for Polish conditions, dissimilar from the main European trends, may be a testimony to richness of intellectual and political ideas of past Polish generations. It was this political thought, that allowed the Polish national identity to survive, and caused that the fight for political independence was successful. Many contemporary researchers, including those from Western Europe, see influences of the past political ideas in the contemporary attitudes of Poles.

José Ortega y Gasset not only expressed his views on subjects such as art or mass culture but he was also one of the promoters and founders of a United Europe which he considered a cultural unity. However, his view on the proper functioning of multicultural societies was as skeptical as his attitude towards the possibility of constructing an unified world that could be based on cultural coexistence of the Western World societies.

We can speak about individual and social (characteristic for a population) values, but it is difficult to present universal, specifically human values, except for biological needs. The reason of it follows from the fact that superior values, related to two human needs (world model cognition and the meaningful sense of life) depend upon a world-view, in advance accepted and inculcated in us. From this world-view we as its followers draw our notions of good and bad, we shape our ideas on proper human relations and on what for us should be the most important. So what can be of universally human character? It seems that only the possibility of possessing a system of values, of forming its features and defining its components.

This essay is an introduction and summary of my detailed study under preparation on the idea of Europe in contemporary Spanish thought. An historical interpretation of Spanish civilization from its earliest beginnings to the present time is presented in the article. I undertake the problem of Spain’s European vocation, specific features of its Christian culture, especially Iberian links with the Islamic world and the question of changes in Spanish identity. The article presents reflections on Europe by the Generation of ‘98 Spanish writers and thinkers (chiefly Angel Ganivet, Miguel de Unamuno and Ramiro de Maeztu) who, in the face of defeat (1898) in the Spanish-American War, proclaimed a program of moral and cultural rebirth for Spain. Their ambivalent attitude towards Europe was rejected by José Ortega y Gasset and Salvador de Madariaga, both the most pro-European 20th century Spanish intellectuals. The problem of Spanishrelation to Europe was also widely discussed after the Civil War under General Franco regime. The evolution from initial isolation to a fuller integration with Europe of the regime and its conservative Catholic culture are also shown in the article. Much attention is devoted to the present-day civil and European Spain led by democratic socialists.

The article explains the origins of European civilization in relation to Minoan (Cretan) civilization. In a synthetic form, it outlines phases of Minoan civilization (prepalatial, protopalatial, neopalatial, postpalatial). It also describes the circumstances and causes of the fall of Minoan civilization. It concludes with an outlook of the Minoan heritage.