The philosophy of myth

elementary

NP2_W11, NP2_U13,

NP2_K01

basic knowledge of philosophy (anthropology, ethics).

Lectures focus on the problemof humanistic academic education, with particular attention being paid to the models targeted at university students majoring in pedagogy and oriented at the acquisition of cultural competencies. The analysis will centre around a culture-forming category of a myth, that is, a category which is present in the process of identifying, understanding and materializing values that are crucial in the development of man as well as in establishing social relationships. Accordingly, a question about an educational function of a myth will be posed; it will be viewed in the light of defining the concept philosophical ideas of contemporary philosophers as well as their great predecessors.

lectures 1-2: Myth and philosophy meeting: topic 1: The uselessness of cognition: from philomites to philosophers; topic 2: logic hidden in myth;

lectures 3-4: Myth and paidea: topic 1: New and old paidea; topic 2: hints from Platonic myths

lectures 5: The magic of thinking and the crisis of rationalism

lecture 6: Prisca theologia

lecture 7-8: Human soul and spirituality - myth, art, philosophy, science

Baudrilllard, Jean (1994). Simulacra and Simulation. Transl. Sheila F. Glaser. Ann Arbor: The University Michigan Press.

Baudrilllard, Jean (2016). The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. London: SAGE Publication Ltd.

Boużyk, Maria (2002). „Arystotelesowska koncepcja racjonalności wobec faktu mitu”. Studia Bobolanum 2/1:145–168.

Boużyk, Maria (2016). „Dlaczego mit? Kilka uwag w świetle filozofii klasycznej”. In: Tożsamość w ezoterycznych nurtach kultury, red. A. Świerzowska i I. Trzcińska, Kraków: Wyd. Libron, pp. 9-26.

Boużyk, Maria (1999). „Między językiem przenośni a dosłownością”. Bobolanum 2: 453–478.

Boużyk, Maria (2008). „Mitologizacja wartości”. Studia Bobolanum 2:143–168.

Boużyk, Maria (2019a). “Mythological narrative and the issue of common space as a goal of education”. Polska Myśl Pedagogiczna 5: 145-160.

Boużyk, Maria (2019b). “Ethical identity as a task of education. In search of modern tools of pedagogical discourse”. Forum Pedagogiczne 2/1: 265-281.

Boużyk, Maria (2019c). “Overview of the project ‘Evaluation of humanistic competences developed in the pedagogical fields in a comparative perspective’”. Forum Pedagogiczne 1: 295-301.

Grzybowski, Jacek et al. (2016). Lękam się świata bez filozofii. O nieodzowności humanistyki w dobie techniki i globalizacji, w: Sposób na filozofię. Kluczowe zagadnienia dydaktyki przedmiotowej, Warszawa: Liberi Libri, pp. 13-46.

Elias, Julius A. (1984). Plato’s Defence of Poetry, SUNY Press, London

Kamiński, Stanisław (1993). Filozofia i metoda, Lublin: TN KUL.

Klemczak, Stefan (2005). „Szaleństwo prób definiowania mitu”. Zeszyty Naukowe UJ. Studia Religiologica 38: 45-64.

Klik, Marcin (2016). Teorie mitu. Współczesne literaturoznawstwo francuskie (1969-2010). Warszawa: Wyd. UW.

Kołakowski, Leszek (2010). The Presence of myth. Chicago: University Chicago Press.

Korten, David C. (1999). The Post-Corporate World: Life After Capitalism. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Mieletinski, Eleazar (1981). Poetyka mitu. Transl. J. Dancygier. Warszawa: PIW.

Murray, Douglas (2018). The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam. London: Bloomsbury Continuum.

Murray, Douglas (2018). The Madness of Crowds, London: Bloomsbury Continuum.

Nowak, Piotr (2014). Hodowanie troglodytów. Uwagi o szkolnictwie wyższym i kulturze umysłowej człowieka współczesnego. Warszawa: Fundacja Augusta hrabiego Cieszkowskiego.

Nowak, Piotr (2016). „Hodowanie troglodytów. Ciąg dalszy nastąpił”. In: Humanistyka z widokiem na uniwersytet, ed.: M. Cieliczko, E. Nowicka I J. Wolska, Poznań: Wyd. UAM, pp 87-100.

Reale, Giovanni (1999). Historia filozofii starożytnej. Vol. 1. Lublin: RW KUL.

Sandel, Michael J. (2020). The Tyranny of Merit. What’s Become to the Common Good? London: Penguin Books, 2020.

Szadkowski, Krystian (2015). Uniwersytet jako dobro wspólne. Podstawy krytycznych badań nad szkolnictwem wyższym. Warszawa: PWN.

Sztompka, Piotr (2014). „Uniwersytet współczesny: zderzenie dwóch kultur”. In: Idea uniwersytetu. Reaktywacja, ed. Piotr Sztompka, Krzysztof Matuszek, Kraków: Wyd. UJ.

Weigel, George (2005). The Cube and the Cathedral. Europa, America Without God. Leominster: Gracewing.

Witkowski, Lech (2007). Edukacja wobec sporów o (po)nowoczesność. Warszawa: Instytut Badań Edukacyjnych.

Welsch, Wolfgang (1997) Undoing Aesthetics. Trans. Inkpin Andrew. London: SAGE Publication Ltd.

Zwierzchowski, Piotr (1997), Myślenie mityczne w pedagogice w świetle koncepcji mitu Ernesta Cassirera. Bydgoszcz: Wyd. Uczelniane Wyższej Szkoły Pedagogicznej w Bydgoszczy.

Zybertowicz, Andrzej et al. (2015), Samobójstwo oświecenia? Jak neuronauka i nowe technologie pustoszą ludzki świat. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Kasper.

(M) The student should name and explain with the language of philosophy the problems of myth in relation to the issue of education. Has a philosophical (theoretical) understanding of man as the creator and subject of culture.

(U) The student is able to formulate in the language of philosophy problems related to the observed socio-cultural phenomena, including the cultural issues of mythologization of values ​​and selected concepts (e.g. the problem of the soul and spirituality).

(K) The student is open to introducing theoretical philosophical problems into his professional practice, thanks to which he also gains greater awareness of culture and the relationships that build it.

STUDENT ACTIVITY and workload in hours

__________________________________________

Lecture hours ......................................... 15

Preparation for classes and reading ............... 20

Preparation for the exam ................ 20

__________________________________________

Total number of ECTS points 2

1) formative assessment:

- to mark 2 - the student does not know the definition of basic concepts in the field of philosophical anthropology and ethics; - is unable to indicate the philosophical concepts of myth, underestimates humanistic knowledge in designing educational activities.

- to mark 3 - The student correctly presents the knowledge of the basic philosophical concepts (ethics, anthropology) and the philosophical concepts of myth. He notices elementary differences between the different languages ​​of reality description, ie the languages ​​of science, art and religion.

- to mark 4 - The student not only correctly presents the knowledge of basic philosophical concepts (ethics, anthropology) and philosophical concepts of myth, but is able to make basic comparisons of the interpretation of the fact of a myth.

- to mark 5 - The student not only compares various philosophical interpretations of the myth, but is able to draw conclusions from the comparisons made and relate them to contemporary culture and educational practice.

2) final grade: grade from the test, which is to show the student's assimilation of the knowledge from lectures and readings.

In the full-time teaching mode, the test consists of 14-15 tasks. For the grade 3.0, the student must obtain 7-8 points; for a score of 3.5-9-10 points; for a grade of 4.0 - 11-12 points; for the grade 4.5 - 13 points; for a grade of 5.0 - 14-15 points.