This paper focuses on Ernst Mach's contributions to teaching on the one side and technology-oriented research on the other side. The first part sums up Mach's views concerning the role of natural sciences and humanities within the curriculum and, in particular, culture in general. The second part deals with Mach's contribution to applied sciences and technology, mentioning some of his most original inventions in that field., Emilie Těšínská, Ivan Landa, Jiří Drahoš., and Obsahuje bibliografii
The article focuses on the conception of absolute idealism elaborated by Czech Hegelian František Sedlák. First, Max Stirner’s position of egoism is presented, as Sedlák was influenced by his critique of the conceptual vertical, i.e. of the subsumption of the individual under abstractions. Second, it examines how Sedlák employed such critique in resolving the so-called “paradox of authority.” Third, it sketches both Sedlák’s reception and critique of Tolstoyanism, at whose conceptual core he encountered a problem associated with conception of abstract morality, which he criticized at first from the standpoint of Stirnerian egoism, later from the standpoint of Hegelian absolute idealism. Finally, Sedlák’s conception of absolute idealism as a philosophy of existence is reconstructed. and Článek se zabývá koncepcí absolutního idealismu českého hegeliána Františka Sedláka. Nejprve je představeno stanovisko egoismu Maxe Stirnera, neboť Sedláka ovlivnila jeho kritika konceptuální vertikály, tj. podřízenosti individua abstrakcím. Ve druhém kroku autor sleduje, jak Sedlák tuto kritiku využívá při řešení tzv. „paradoxu autority“. Následně je přiblížen Sedlákův příklon k tolstojovství, v jehož jádru však Sedlák záhy naráží na obtíže související s tolstojovským pojetím abstraktní morality. Sedlák s ním polemizuje nejprve ze stanoviska stirnerovského egoismu, později absolutního idealismu a hegeliánství. V závěrečném kroku je nakonec představena Sedlákova koncepce absolutního idealismu jako filosofie existence.
The central question of philosophical anthropology is: What is the difference between man and other living beings? While traditionally philosophers attempted to answer this question by pointing to a certain property or ability belonging exclusively to man, Karl Marx performed a theoretical revolution in philosophical anthropology by introducing a new way of how to deal with the problem of anthropological difference. The aim of the paper is, firstly, to analyse the very form, which is common for the answers to the central question of philosophical anthropology, and to describe the dynamic which is characteristic for discussions concerning the anthropological difference. Secondly it depicts Ludwig Feuerbach’s solution to the problem, in which he introduced the concept of a species being. The third step focuses on Marx’s understanding of human nature, in which a central place is given to the concept of species powers. The fourth step sketches Marx’s own solution to the problem of the anthropological difference. In the final step a consideration is given to the underlying motivation of this solution.