We confront two seemingly incompatible positions in regard to the past. One, the modal status of a proposition is unchangeable; and two, that omnipotence is trumped only by necessity., S ohledem na minulost konfrontujeme dvě zdánlivě neslučitelné postoje. Jeden, modální stav návrhu je neměnný; a dva, že všemocnost je trumfována pouze nutností., and Alex Blum
A usual objection put forward against the causal theory of reference is that it cannot explain the reference changes that terms may undergo. The main aim of this paper is to examine the position on reference change of one of the classic supporters of the causal theory, Hilary Putnam. It is usually claimed that Putnam’s causal theory of reference of natural kind terms is closely related to Kripke’s theory and can be conceived as a development of the same. The motivation of this paper is to allege that there is at least one important difference between both theories, consisting of their explanation of reference changes or at least in the way in which those theories make reference changes possible. After dealing with the problem of reference change within the framework of Kripke’s theory and reconstructing Kripke’s proposal to account for it, we will allege that there are components of Putnam’s theory which make reference changes possible, although they are different from those present in Kripke’s theory., Obvyklá námitka vznesená proti kauzální teorii je, že nemůže vysvětlit změny, které mohou podmínky podléhat. Hlavním cílem této práce je prozkoumat postoj k referenční změně jednoho z klasických stoupenců kauzální teorie Hilary Putnam. To je obvykle prohlašoval, že Putnamova kauzální teorie odkazu přirozených laskavých termínů je blízko příbuzná Kripke teorii a moci být koncipován jako vývoj stejný. Motivací tohoto článku je tvrzení, že existuje alespoň jeden důležitý rozdíl mezi oběma teoriemi, spočívající v jejich vysvětlení referenčních změn nebo přinejmenším ve způsobu, jakým tyto teorie umožňují referenční změny. Poté, co se zabýval problémem změny referencí v rámci Kripkeho teorie a rekonstruoval Kripkeho návrh, aby se o něm zmínil., and Luis Fernández Moreno
The East-Central European post-socialist transformations have now reached a new stage, with the need to address the problems of further modernisation and maintenance in the context of the EU. The role of elites in this process is as intermediators between the influence of the European context and the needs and interests of differentiated internal social structures. Their attitudes and behaviour exhibit a high degree of internal fragmentation and division corresponding to various strategical orientations favouring various societal models. The post-socialist Czech economic elite was initially reproduced out of former state socialist managers and their cadre reserves. After the first phase of economic developments, inspired by neo-liberal radical privatisation and elements of 'shock therapy', and once the new, more European phase ushered in many new factors, there was a distinct decline in the number of 'old-new' economic elite on the scene. In the empirical part of the article the results of several surveys are used to briefly describe the changes in the composition of the Czech economic elite in the 1994-2005 period and to summarise their attitudes and behaviour. The analysis concludes that the current image of a liberal and pro-European Czech elite is consistent with the stable and remarkable progress of the Czech economy since 1999, the considerable wealth, strong profits, and high salaries enjoyed by top elites, and the enhancement of their role in the European economy. There are also some limitations and weak points that diverge from this general picture. The article's conclusions touch on the question of the role of the economic elite in the progress of arriving at more consensual attitudes and behaviour among societal elites as a whole, favouring further economic growth, modernisation and the strengthening of social cohesion in the context of the EU.