The leading purpose of this paper is to provide an answer to the question whether Karl Marx belongs to philosophy and history of philosophy, and whether placing him in these categories gives a fair picture of what he really intended to achieve. When analyzing Marx’s thought, one should remember that is his own eyes he was not a philosopher but a researcher who goes beyond the horizon of philosophy in order to undertake scientific and not ideological work aimed at organizing political battles of that time. Of course, what a particular thinker believes of himself cannot be an ultimate criterion for interpreting his/her academic output. The doubts are augmented when we consult Leszek Kołakowski’s Main Currents of Marxism – a book that is based on the assumption that “Karl Marx was a German philosopher”, and this starting point supports the critique of Marx’s thought. The problem arises from the fact that Leszek Kołakowski, who was a post-Marxist, despises science and philosophy, and sees myth as the basis of thought dynamics. Thus the question of the adequacy of his presentation of Marx aris es and strengthens the suspicion that Kołakowski did not present the real Marx’s philosophy but rather a myth of Marx’s theory centered on the idea of making people happy against their will and nature.

The social and political transformations Russia underwent in the 20th century were also reflected in the sphere of imagery. This also refers to the imagery of movement and means of transport. The process of linking the imagery of means of transportation with the political doctrine in force is mostly visible in the period of Soviet rule, in particular in the interwar period when the foundations of this rule were laid. Then, aviation was to become one of the strongly ideologized means of transport. The ideologization process occurred at various levels, starting from onomastic procedures through advertising and linking aviation and Soviet rule within artistic and literary conceptualisations. In Soviet culture, an aeroplane or a rocket were not merely means of transport but the means by which the expansion of communist ideology globally was supposed to be facilitated.

Stefan Żeromski and Florian Znaniecki, perceived by many of their contemporaries as undisputed moral authorities, warned in the fi rst period of the existence of the Second Polish Republic against the danger of infl uence of Bolshevik ideology. They undertook issues of fundamental importance for the understanding of mutual relations and conditions between the socio-economic world, art, material prosperity, revolution and progress in the period after the First World War (1914–1918), when the power of the Bolsheviks had strengthened in Russia, and the Poles formed the foundations independent homeland. This text is an attempt to approximate the position of Żeromski and Znaniecki in this matter.

The article presents a comparative analysis of various classifi cations of both sciences’ and management sciences’ paradigms in terms of their pragmatism and adequacy regarding organization research. Furthermore, the aim of the article is also to justify the thesis about the high usefulness of research model proposed by Keneth D. Strang. Strang’s model, based on the concept of researcher’s socio-cultural philosophy, allows on the one hand to overcome the theoretical incommensurability and on the other hand makes it possible for representatives of various paradigms to cooperate with each other. The article contains also refl ections on the paradigm as a key factor affecting both the development of management sciences and the practice of management. The choice of a specifi c paradigm, i.e. research ideology, has a decisive impact on the results of research, as well as the generalization of practice. The paradigm defi nes the research strategy, selection of research methods and inference rules. Furthermore, it infl uences the education process, and thus has an impact on shaping the worldview of scientists, entrepreneurs as well as managers.

The aim of this paper is to consider the not so well investigated problem of the role that language has played in Karl Marx’s thinking. The first section discusses several examples of Marxist attempts at philosophical or linguistic reflection on language. I propose the thesis that Marxist meaning theory did not seriously evolve due to the domination of the ‛Traditional Meaning Theory’ (TMT) – irrespective of the actual social conditions. In the second section I undertake some adumbrations on the tendencies of contemporary philosophy of language, such as externalism or pragmatism, whose premonitions can be found in Marx. I also point out that combined with historical materialism they can no longer fit TMT. Finally, I argue that the notion of language and the division of linguistic labor may solve some issues of Marx’s conception of ideology.

I address the question of Marx’s understanding of the role and function of religion in social life. Marx’s pronouncements on this topic are few and far between. Yet relying on them I undertake to examine the proposal ostensibly made by Marx that it was possible, or even necessary, to purge religious institutions and religious attitudes from social life. I point to a number of inconsistencies and errors that Marx committed in making such proposals.

The text discusses Roger Scruton’s most important philosophical views. Scruton was a conservative whose world view was firmly grounded in the Anglo-Saxon philo-sophical tradition. At the same time, he was a man of versatile interests (aesthetics, music, architecture, ecology), which was reflected in his rich creativity. He was a critic of all leftist and liberal ideologies, so he rejected both the liberal meaning of freedom and socialist meaning of equality. He understood freedom as an element of social bonds and hierarchical order. His philosophy revolves around such categories as property, natural justice, common law and oikophilia, on which he bases his ecological project („green philosophy”). Scruton’s texts also contain elements of conservative political practice.

Professor Jerzy Pelc was the creator and long-time manager of the Department of Logical Semiotics, University of Warsaw. He also founded the Polish Society of Semiotics. He published six own books, among others Studies in Functional Logical Semiotics of Natural Language (1971; in English); he edited also dozens of volumes of Semiotic Studies and Library of Semiotic Thought. As Kotarbiński, his master, and Twardowski, the master of his master, Professor Pelc was a radical rationalist. This radical rationalism has linked him to atheism, anti-communism, a distance to politics, and a frown on the falsehood of public life. He was a great patriot – in his life and in his work. He considered himself a successor of the Lvov-Warsaw School tradition. In the field of metaphysics, Professor Pelc combined theoretical minimalism with anti-rationalist attitudes, including the postulate of precision and the requirement of criticism. The main field of his interest was logical – and broader: theoretical – semiotics. He advocated and largely developed the functional concept of signs. To traditional paradigms of research: historical, teleological, causal and prognostic ones – Professor Pelc has added a semiotic paradigm, determined by the question “What does it mean that p?”. Referring to the interdisciplinary fashion for interdisciplinary research, he conducted an analysis of the notion of INTERDISCIPLINARITY. In ontology, he analyzed the notions of OBJECT and CAUSALITY. In his approach, aesthetics was treated form a semiotic point of view: he sought mainly ways to logically rewrite its terminology. In particular, he reconstructed the main aesthetic notions: FORM and IDEOLOGY (of literary works), THEME, MOTIVE, METAPHOR and (literary) FICTION – as well as semiotic notions essential to the description of literary arts, namely the notions of ASSERTION and INTENSIONALITY. In the field of ethics, Professor Pelc declared himself as an advocate of the ideal of trustworthy guardian, which he took over from his teacher, Kotarbiński. In metaethics, he analyzed the notions of NORM, EVALUATION and HUMANITY. A master of Polish: beautiful Polish – he was certainly a true humanist.