Detail príspevku/publikácie

Abstrakt

The present article was written on the occasion ol the death of the Polish logician, Jan Lukasiewicz. In the introduction the authors comment very briefly on Lukasiewicz's contribution towards the development of modern logic and dwell in particular on his programme for setting up an exact philosophy, which he outlined in his work on „O metodg w filozofii“ and referred to in some other studies. This study has for its aim an analysis of the questions relative to the possibilities and prospects of exact philosophy. In the second part the authors deal in more detail with the analysis of terms in exact language and exact language expression. The term of exact language is defined by conditions A—G. A language fulfilling these conditions is actually an interpreted formalized language. In the authors’view, philosophers ought to strive for a positive solution tc problems or setting up systems, in a language which would comply with conditions A—G, or at least with some of them. On the basis of elementary notions on the logical structure of the questions and conditions A—G, the meaning of exactly formulated problem is defined. The authors do not question the need and importance of a natural language in philosophy, but point to the dangers and difficulties connected with its use as well as to the need of explaining inexact linguistic expressions in philosophy also. Furthermore, they define the term of exact solution of problems (they note those methods only which enable a problem to be solved by means of operations with language expressions). They point out here the lack of clarity in connection with specifically philosophical methods of setting up a philosophical system and with methods involved in solving philosophical problems. In the concluding part, the authors underline the priorities and advantages of an exact language for formulating philosophical systems and problems, and they criticise those among the philosophers who consider accuracy in this sense as being either unnecessary or inadequate to the nature of philosophy, stressing at the same time the fact that every philosophy claiming to be scientific, must satisfy these criteria.