This book introduces an important chapter of Polish 20th century philosophy, by analyzing the studies that contributed to value theory; i.e. the studies of Kazimierz Twardowski, Tadeusz Czeżowski, Tadeusz Kotarbiński, Władysław Tatarkiewicz, Roman Ingarden, Henryk Elzenberg, Maria Ossowska, and Józef Maria Bocheński.

An attempt is made in the present essay to accommodate various senses of the notion of existence and ofthat of non-existence within the framework of logic. With this aim in view a system of Lesniewski's Ontology, referred to as System S, is outlined. Equipped with appropriate definitions and illustrated with a selection of theses it offers a logical theory of existence and non-existence. The usefulness of the theory is then tested by interpreting in its terms some of the principal notions (...) and assertions of Meinong's ontology. A few brief comments on the notion of 'possible object' and on 'semantics' of fiction conclude the essay. (shrink)

As the author sees it, Tadeusz Kotarbiński's reism is an ontology with semantical ramifications. Contrary to Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz's view the reist is not commited to any particular categorially determined language; he has to use, and is at liberty to do so, the language of whoever happens to be his opponent always provide that it is a categorially determined language. Contrary to Ajdukiewicz's opinion, the positive ontological thesis of resim (i.e. the thesis that for all a and b, if a is (...) a b, then a is bulky and lasting) is not a tautology; it is a denial of the thesis held by unicategorial Platonism. Contrary to Ajdukiewicz's insistence, the negative ontological thesis of reism (i.e. the thesis that there are no properties, there are no relations, there are no events, etc.) consists of propositions which, in the light of multicategorial idealization of ordinary language, are meaningful and syntactically well constructed. They deny equally meaningful and syntactically well constructed assertions of multicategorial Platonism. (shrink)

Credibility and reliability of counter-partners are the most important features required for the efficient functioning of financial markets. Violating these requirements is an important aspect of the operational risk, posed by the human factor – both internal (managers, employees) and external (customers, shareholders, competitors, supervisors). Therefore, having a limited impact on the behaviour of outside persons, the financial institutions formulate high standards towards their own personnel. It concerns formal qualifications and professional experience, as well as specific personality traits and appropriate (...) behaviour in various situations. These standards are specified in numerous recent ethics codes – documents formulating the socalled ‘corporate governance best practices’ in internal and external relations to other people. The aim of this paper is to draw attention to the fact that some of these standards generate in praxis a number of dilemmas or even conflict situations, when there appears a question of to what extent the application of a given rule does not breach other rules. Theoretically, corporate governance practices should be internally consistent. However, everyday experience brings such a multitude of real situations, diverse human characters or individual reactions that there appears a need for a sensible compromise between values of equal importance which, in some cases, prove contradicting. (shrink)