Jakub Pruś

Jesuit University Ignatianum In Cracow
  •  424
    Znaczenie znaczenia w argumentacji. Zarys argumentów semantycznych
    In Ewa Szkudlarek-Śmiechowicz, Wierzbicka, Agnieszka & Elwira Olejniczak (eds.), Słowo. Znaczenie – struktura – kontekst. 2020.
    Jeśli można mówić o modzie w badaniach naukowych, to semantyka jest od prawie wieku niewątpliwie jedną z bardziej modnych dziedzin w nauce. Badają ją nie tylko logicy i filozofowie języka, lecz także kulturoznawcy, antropologowie, filologowie, kognitywiści czy informatycy. Niniejszy artykuł ma na celu zbadanie roli, jaką odgrywa semantyka w teorii argumentacji, a dokładniej — zarysowanie pewnego modelu argumentacji, który modyfikuje znaczenia terminów dla celów argumentacyjnych. Najpierw przedst…Read more
  •  251
    The aim of the article is to defi ne a certain type of argumentation, which has been scarcely described so far in either Polish or foreign literature in the fi eld of argumentation theory, and thus to systematize the problems of research on semantic procedures in argumentation. The analysis of the ways in which a modifi cation of meaning can affect the power of arguments inclines to distinguish a new type of argumentation - semantic argumentation. The concepts of persuasive de…Read more
  •  87
    A few years ago, Krzysztof Czerniawski published the book Three Ver- sions of the Epistemic Theory of Truth: Dummett, Putnam, Wright. It at- tracted my attention, as while there are many works which are concerned with the philosophical problem of truth, there are just a few compara- tive studies of different ideas concerning the theory of truth. The author in question focuses on the so-called Epistemic Theory of Truth, which as- sumes, according to the characterization of Wolfgang Künne, that be…Read more
  •  65
    The overarching goal of this book is to differentiate and provide a highly detailed descriptive account of a specific class of arguments. To simplify, let us consider the following example: suppose one aims to persuade that “Julius Caesar was a criminal.” To support that claim various arguments may be formulated, such as: a) Joseph Stalin murdered his political opponents who openly opposed him, thus he was a criminal. Julius Caesar did the same. Therefore, if Stalin was a criminal, then Caesar w…Read more
  •  45
    Is Every Definition Persuasive?
    Informal Logic 42 (1): 25-47. 2022.
    “Is every definition persuasive?” If essentialist views on definition are rejected and a pragmatic account adopted, where defining is a speech act which fixes the meaning of a term, then a problem arises: if meanings are not fixed by the essence of being itself, is not every definition persuasive? To address the problem, we refer to Douglas Walton’s impressive intellectual heritage—specifically on the argumentative potential of definition. In finding some non-persuasive definitions, we show not …Read more
  •  30
    The paper presents Alfred Tarski’s debate with the semantic antinomies: the basic Liar Paradox, and its more sophisticated versions, which are currently discussed in philosophy: Strengthen Liar Paradox, Cyclical Liar Paradox, Contingent Liar Paradox, Correct Liar Paradox, Card Paradox, Yablo’s Paradox and a few others. Since Tarski, himself did not addressed these paradoxes—neither in his famous work published in 1933, nor in later papers in which he developed the Semantic Theory of Truth—theref…Read more
  •  30
    Pośród wielu teorii prawdy tę najdłużej i najbardziej eksplorowaną stanowi niewątpliwie jej klasyczne ujęcie. W jego obrębie powstały również, podobne klasycznej, teorie korespondencyjna i semantyczna. Dla wielu filozofów terminy te wydają się synonimiczne, co stanowi rację powstania niniejszego artykułu. Analiza rodzajów związku pomiędzy językiem a światem, które wprowadzają różne teorie uznawane za klasyczne, ma służyć wyeksponowaniu różnic pomiędzy tymi teoriami. Przedstawiona zostaje również…Read more
  •  23
    How Can Christian Philosophers Improve Their Arguments?
    Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 28 (1): 63-83. 2023.
    The purpose of this paper is to analyse and compare two concepts which tend to be treated as synonymous, and to show the difference between them: these are critical thinking and logical culture. Firstly, we try to show that these cannot be considered identical or strictly equivalent: i.e. that the concept of logical culture includes more than just critical thinking skills. Secondly, we try to show that Christian philosophers, when arguing about philosophical matters and teaching philosophy to st…Read more
  •  20
    The aim of this article is to show how modifications of meaning can influence argumentation. I present the basic concept of so-called ‘semantic argumentation,’ its definition, and its different variants. I analyse the various kinds of argument in which meanings of terms are modified in support of a persuasive goal. The analysis of different semantic arguments reveals certain structures and patterns that are needed to construct a typology of such arguments. I thus outline a basic concept of argum…Read more
  •  18
    Trzy wersje epistemicznej teorii prawdy: Dummett, Putnam, Wright
    Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 23 (1): 133-139. 1970.
    Few years ago Krzysztof Czerniawski has published a book „Three Versions of Epistemic Theory of Truth: Dummett, Putnam, Wright”. It drew my attention, for there are many works which are concerned with the philosophical problem of truth, but only few comparative studies between different ideas concerning theory of truth. Author focuses on so-called Epistemic Theory of Truth, which assumes—according to the characteristics of Wolfgang Künne—that being true depends to some extent on our judgement. I…Read more
  •  13
    Is Every Definition Persuasive?
    Informal Logic 43 (4): 25-47. 2022.
    “Is every definition persuasive?” If essentialist views on definition are rejected and a pragmatic account adopted, where defining is a speech act which fixes the meaning of a term, then a problem arises: if meanings are not fixed by the essence of being itself, is not every definition persuasive? To address the problem, we refer to Douglas Walton’s impressive intellectual heritage—specifically on the argumentative potential of definition. In finding some non-persuasive definitions, we show not …Read more
  •  7
    The Dialectical Principle of Charity: A Procedure for a Critical Discussion
    with Piotr Sikora
    Argumentation 37 (4): 577-600. 2023.
    This paper aims to discuss a well-known concept from argumentation theory, namely the principle of charity. It will show that this principle, especially in its contemporary version as formulated by Donald Davidson, meets with some serious problems. Since we need the principle of charity in any kind of critical discussion, we propose the way of modifying it according to the presupponendum—the rule written in the sixteenth century by Ignatius Loyola. While also corresponding with pragma-dialectica…Read more
  •  1
    Krzysztof Czerniawski. Trzy wersje epistemicznej teorii prawdy
    Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 23 (1): 133-139. 1970.
    Few years ago Krzysztof Czerniawski has published a book „Three Versions of Epistemic Theory of Truth: Dummett, Putnam, Wright”. It drew my attention, for there are many works which are concerned with the philosophical problem of truth, but only few comparative studies between different ideas concerning theory of truth. Author focuses on so-called Epistemic Theory of Truth, which assumes—according to the characteristics of Wolfgang Künne—that being true depends to some extent on our judgement. I…Read more