Tyrš originally contemplated a scientific career in the field of philosophy but his theoretical interest gradually turned to aesthetics and plastic arts. T e specific culmination of his activities was his role of a founder of the gymnastic association Sokol in this his theoretical experiencefocused in the form of a distinctive “philosophy of living”. The author of this essay seeks to show a deeper philosophic and aesthetic level which shaped Tyrš’s Sokol idea. – Tyrš activism found a philosophic parallel in Schopenhauer’s voluntarism. Darwin’s conception of “struggle for sur¬vival” helped justify Tyrš’s conception of an armed and culturally active nationalism. Tyrš was fascinated with the mature culture of ancient Greece and in his conception Sokol was to be an embodiment of classic values in modern conditions.
It is known that Miroslav Tyrš engaged intensively with philosophy, aesthetics and the history of creative art, even if his participation in the emergence of the sport and gymnastics organisation Sokol is more striking. In view of the fact that Tyrš’s work is an interesting symbiosis or eclecticism from several philosophical and aesthetic streams rather than a tight synthesis, I have attempted to point to one overlooked aspect of Tyrš’s work by stressing his affinity to the Czech aesthetic Herbartian tradition. Tyrš was a direct pupil of the eminent systematic Herbartian aesthetician Robert Zimmermann, and we can trace the influence of Zimmermann’s thought in Tyrš’s work, above all in the articles “Gymnastics from the Aesthetic Point of View” and “On the Laws of Composition in Creative Art”. Tyrš attempted to formulate the principles which every aesthetic creative aim should conform to, and he endeavoured to specificy the formal laws of compositional-construction in creative work, founded on empirical research. I treat it as demonstrable that this endeavour puts Tyrš in the tradition of concrete formalism, which is most prominently represented in Czech culture by Otakar Hostinský., Miloš Matúšek., and Obsahuje poznámky a bibliografii
Study analyses public philosophic debate in 1844–48 in which topic of distinctively “Czech philosophy” was first articulated and discussed as a “debate about the being and non-being of German philosophy in Czech lands”. Author acquaints reader with intellectual context of arising Czech philosophy in first half of 19th century, based on conceptual influence of Herder, Hegel and Herbart. Starting point of that discussion was role of philosophy as academic subject at University and as part of literature and culture generally. In an analysis of the debate and of positions of chief participants (K. Havlíček, V. Gabler, F. Čupr, A. Smetana, K. B. Štorch) study shows that as subject of reflection the discussion included prob¬lems of philosophy in Czech language, place and role of philosophy in the Czech lands, of special traits of Czech “national” philosophy, its limits and possibilities, of reception of German classical philosophy and finally even meta-philosophical question of what philosophy is or ought to be in general. Two examples of the way this debate was recalled and updated in the 20th century in quite different situation of the period between the wars (F. Pelikán) and after the wars (K. Kosík) – in the twenties and in the fifties – show subsequently the transformed contexts and problems of modern Czech philosophy. Analysis of the debate and its heritage are placed within the overall discussion of what Czech philosophy is from linguistic, territorial, national and factual viewpoint.
Stanislav of Znojmo (died 1414), a professor of the Prague Theological Faculty, first a teacher and friend to Jan Hus, but then his decided opponent, wrote a comprehensive treatise, probably around 1403, entitled De vero et falso. The subject of my article is an analysis of the content of this work. In it, Stanislav deals with the question of the truth of a proposition and the problem of its truth-maker. The question of the truth-maker falls into the area of metaphysics, and so the author speaks of metaphysical truth. In so far as metaphysical truth is concerned, Stanislav of Znojmo defends a decidedly realist standpoint, judging that categorematic expressions are not alone in having real counterparts in the world, but syncategorematic expressions (for example, statement conjunctions, words expressing negations and so on) also have such counterparts. Stanislav’s treatise, in its overall orientation, belongs to propositionalism, a trend in logical thought widespread at the end of the Middle Ages. Although the author of the treatise De vero et falso does not cite contemporary authors, he shows a knowledge of some exponents of propositional logic (namely Gregory of Rimini, for example). His main inspiration, however, is undoubtedly the work of John Wyclif.