Author(s): / Language(s): Czech
Jan Zouhar describes the development of Patočka’s stance on Masaryk and his philosophy in his paper “Jan Patočka and T. G. Masaryk”. The author shows the contradictions in Masaryk’s philosophy discovered by Patočka. In particular, he presents Masaryk’s attempt for scientific objectivism together with his conviction of the personal governance of the world by Providence. He also deals with Patočka’s criticism of Masaryk’s dissociation from Cartesian rationalism and his transition to Comte’s principals of the philosophy of history. The author finds the principal divergence between Patočka and Masaryk in the issue of the construction of Czech history and its evaluation (the climaxes of Czech history), as well as in the search for the sources of crises and their solutions. Petr Jemelka focuses on the beginnings of Patočka’s philosophical career in the first Czech philosophical journal Česká mysl (The Czech mind) in his paper “Jan Patočka and Česká Mysl”. Jemelka’s text is based on the detailed analysis of Patočka’s articles and reviews published in the journal since 1928. He also notes the problem of the critical acceptance of phenomenology in Czech philosophy. Michal Černý’s paper: “Caring for the soul as the basis of phenomenological pedagogy in the context of educational technologies” deals with phenomenological concepts of pedagogy by Patočka and Fink in connection to the new technological alternatives in education. The author confronts Patočka’s pedagogical style and Fink’s philosophy of education with the new forms and methods of education such as self-organised learning, connectivism etc. Lucie Divišová describes in her paper: “The French World of Jan Patočka” Jan Patočka’s French experience during his studies at Sorbonne (and lectures of Edmund Husserl) through his reflections on French philosophy (especially existentialism) to the interest of the French in Patočka as a philosopher and a dissident. Lucie Divišová maps out those Patočka’s themes that contribute to French thinking in the (not only contemporary) “European community of (sympathetically) shaken” In “Patočka’s Concept of Responsibility as a Non-orgiastic Overcoming of Everydayness” bases Dalibor Hejna his analysis on a distinction made by the Czech philosopher Jan Patočka between demonic, orgiastic experience of the sacral and responsibility connected to the philosophical questioning as the two forms of overcoming servitude. Dušan Hruška interprets Patočka’s idea of negative Platonism from the 1950s as a reconstruction of Greek metaphysics with the far-reaching theoretical and practical consequences. He points out Patočka’s non-traditional perception of connections among Jewish, Greek and Christian origins of Europe as well as Patočka’s effort for inner pluralism of modern discursive universe instead of unifying (metaphysically well-founded) alternative. The author completes the paper by pointing out the hidden metaphysical themes of the philosophical problem of freedom in a confrontation with Nietzsche’s and Heidegger’s opinions on these issues. Slavomír Lesňák analyses the possibilities of Patočka’s ethical ideal of combatants and ascetics in his paper called: “Solidarity of the Shaken in Times of Ecological Crisis.” He compares it to the ideal of the temporary autonomous zone of Hakim Bey. He concludes that Patočka’s solidarity of the shaken by an ecological crisis is intensified by the crisis’ increased severity. The author believes that the applicability of Patočka’s ethical concept of solidarity of the shaken will be more topical during an ecological catastrophe. Katarína Mayer confronts Patočka’s and Rorty’s approach to the question of the timeless ideal of human freedom in her paper “Patočka and Rorty (Few Comments on the Question of Freedom).” Mayer finds differences in notions of these authors concerning the concept of freedom as a random possibility, which were refused by Patočka. On contrary, as the author claims, the freedom is underpinned on history. The historical context reveals meaningfulness of freedom and acting in present. Radovan Rybář attempts to define Patočka as the Socratic figure in his paper: “Timelessness and Limitlessness of Jan Patočka’s Ideas”. The author interprets Patocka’s understanding of phenomenology by drawing inspiration from content analyses of selected texts on Patočka. Patočka’s caring for soul is noted by the author not only in philosophy but in politics as well. In the context of the European crisis of meaning (in modern times), he concludes that man enters history only by living in defiance to any present arbitrarily ruling power. Róbert Stojka analyses in his paper “The Concept of History and Historicity in Patočka’s Philosophy” the main line of Patočka’s philosophy of history – especially the relationship of man and history and historicity. According to the author the principle on which Patočka introduces his periodicity of history is the rise from decadence. Patočka’s idea of caring for soul that aided to the forming of the spiritual European man as well as Europe as a spiritual structure is a part of his understaning of history. According to Radim Šíp, Patočka’s philosophy of history and his concept of European time have limits, which are based on the lack of reflection of the neo-Hellenistic Enlightenment myth. As a consequence of this is not only Patočka’s loss of sense of reality when constituting phenomenological philosophy of history, but also a problem with distinguishing between formulating the ideal of freedom, responsibility and democracy and their actual fulfilment. Serious shortcomings, emerging from applying this approach that Radim Šíp calls „nostalgic romanticism”, also manifested in philosophy of education of Patočka’s follower R. Palouš. Radim Štěrba attempts to define Patočka’s contribution to the interpretation of the pedagogical legacy of Comenius in the context of the contemporary theory of education in his paper: “To Patočka’s Reflection of Pedagogical Ideas by J. A. Comenius”. He analyses pivotal Patočka’s Comenius-related texts and finds the problems both Comenius and Patočka faced with implementing the concept of the openness of soul. He presents the necessity of an authentic conversion to the open soul, deep inner transformation towards true humanity, which might be one of the few ways how to escape out of the crisis of contemporary society. The paper: “At Home? Phenomenology, Jan Patočka and the Meaning of Home” written by Barbora Vacková searches for phenomenological inspiration for Social science research of the meaning (and nature) of home in Jan Patočka’s work. The author uses Patočka’s perspective, as presented in his text “Prostor a jeho problematika (Space and its issues)” written in 1961 (however the first print was in 1985), while interpreting the empirical data gathered from the research project focused on making home more meaningful construction and experiencing it. The author considers in this adjusted phenomenological context the meaning of concepts of home and homeland for forming a relationship with “Others” and cohabitation with them. Erika Vonková describes in her paper “Jan Patočka as a Guide on the Journey to the Underworld” Jan Patočka as a possible guide from the world of shadows to the real world. The fate of Jan Patočka’s spiritual man is to live in a community and as such is of the opinion that he cannot resign, must abandon fear and become the man of politics. Such man in demonstrative and purposeful fashion casts the result of his own restless philosophical spirit in the face of his community – indeterminate reality. The political task of spiritual man is to destroy the image of the complete and known world of his fellow citizens and by doing so help them rebuilt it.
More...
