Albertazzi, Liliana. 1993. "Brentano, Twardowski and Polish Scientific Philosophy." In Polish Scientific Philosophy: the Lvov-Warsaw
School, edited by Coniglione, Francesco, Poli, Roberto and Wolenski, Jan, 11-40. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Betti, Arianna. 2006. "Sempiternal Truth. The Bolzano-Twardowski-Leśniewski Axis." In The Lvov-Warsaw School. The New Generation,
edited by Jadacki, Jacek Jusliuz and Pasniczek, Jacek, 371-399. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
———. 2006. "The Strange Case of Savonarola and the Painted Fish. On the Bolzanization of Polish Thought." In Actions, Products, and
Things. Brentano and Polish Philosophy, edited by Chrudzimski, Arkadiusz, 55-81. Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.
"I have previously discussed in several papers specific Bolzanian elements present in the Polish tradition. This paper will not, for the most
part, add anything in particular to that. The new - and rather blunt hypothesis to be put forward here is that, despite appearances, Twardowski also
contributed de facto to slowing down the reception of Bolzano's most modem logical discoveries. For in Poland Bolzano was to remain one logician among
many for rather long. It was chiefly thanks to two factors that Bolzano's star could, slowly, begin to rise in Poland, or, at least, that the fundamental
achievements of his logic could be known. One factor is antipsychologistic (more precisely Platonistic) influence coming from Husserl and from Twardowski's
student Łukasiewicz. The other factor is the change in the conception of logic which took Polish logic from, say, Sigwart, to Tarski through Leśniewski and
Łukasiewicz," p. 55
———. 2013. "We Owe It to Sigwart! A New Look at the Content/object Distinction in Early Phenomenological Theories of Judgment from Brentano
to Twardowski." In Judgement and Truth in Early Analytic Philosophy and Phenomenology, edited by Textor, Mark, 74-96. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Betti, Arianna, and Schaar, Maria van der. 2004. "The Road from Vienna to Lvov: Twardowski's Theory of Judgement Between 1894 and 1897." Grazer Philosophische Studien no. 67:1-20.
"In several manuscripts, written between 1894 and 1897, Twardowski developed a new theory of judgment with two types of judgment: existential
and relational judgments. In Zur Lehre he tried to stay within a Brentanian framework, although he introduced the distinction between content and
object in the theory of judgment. The introduction of this distinction forced Twardowski to revise further Brentano's theory. His changes concerned judgments
about relations and about nonpresent objects. The latter are considered special cases of relational judgments. The existential judgments are analyzed in a
Bobryk, Jerzy. 2009. "The Genesis and History of Twardowski's Theory of Actions and Products." In The Golden Age of Polish Philosophy.
Kazimierz Twardowski's Philosophical Legacy, edited by Lapointe, Sandra, Wolenski, Jan, Marion, Mathieu and Miskiewicz, Wioletta, 33-42. New York:
Brandl, Johannes. 1998. "Twardowski's Distinction between Actions and éroducts." In The Lvov-Warsaw School and Contemporary
Philosophy, edited by Kijania-Placek, Katarzyna and Wolenski, Jan, 23-34. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Brożek, Anna. 2014. "The significance of Kazimierz Twardowski in philosophy and culture." PRO-FIL no. 15:32-46.
Buczynska-Garewicz, Hanna. 1980. "Twardowski's Idea of Act and Meaning." Dialectic and Humanism no. 3:153-164.
———. 1985. "Twardowski's Concept of Sign and Meaning." In Semiotics 1984, edited by Deely, John, 557-565. Lanham: University Press
Cavallin, Jens. 1996. "The Metaphysics of the Analysis of Mind." Axiomathes no. 3:335-350.
———. 1997. Content and Object. Husserl, Twardowski and Psychologism. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
———. 2001. "Contents. Psycho-physical Products and Representations. Some notes on the Theories of Kazimierz Twardowski." In The Dawn of
Cognitive Science. Early European Contributors, edited by Albertazzi, Liliana, 185-208. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Czarnecki, Tadeusz. 1998. "Inspirations and Controversies: from the Letters between K. Twardowski and A. Meinong." In The Lvov-Warsaw
School and Contemporary Philosophy, edited by Kijania-Placek, Katarzyna and Wolenski, Jan, 35-42. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Czezowski, Tadeusz. 1948. "Kazimierz Twardowski as a Teacher." Studia Philosophica 1939-1946 no. 3:11-17.
———. 1960. "Tribute to Kazimierz Twardowski on the 10th Anniversary of His Death in 1938." Journal of Philosophy no. 57:209-215.
Fréchette, Guillaume. 2012. "Twardowski on Signs and Products." Paradigmi no. 30:61-75.
Hickerson, Ryan. 2005. "Getting the Quasi-Picture: Twardowskian Representationalism and Husserl's Argument Against It." Journal of the
History of Philosophy no. 43:461-480.
———. 2007. The History of Intentionality. New York: Continuum.
Contetns: Acknowledgements IX; Introduction 1; 1. What was Brentano's problem? Physical phenomena in Psychology from empirical
standpoint 21; 2. Getting the quasi-picture: Twardowski's On the content and object of representations 45; 3. Not getting the quasi-picture:
Husserl critique of Twardowski 57; 4. Phenomenology without phenomena: Husserl's break with Brentano 65; 5. Husserl's riddle and the 'real' content of
consciousness: a Jamesian reading of Logical Investigations V 83; Conclusion 109; Appendix: The text and reception of the Logical
Investigations 121; Notes 125; Bibliography 159; Index 169.
Ingarden, Roman. 1948. "The Scientific Activity of Kazimierz Twardowski." Studia Philosophica 1939-1946 no. 3:17-30.
Jacquette, Dale. 1987. "Twardowski on Content and Object." Conceptus.Zeitschrift für Philosophie no. 21:193-199.
"Kasimir Twardowski's reduction of psychological experience to an act, Content, and Object had a decided impact on the development of modern
phenomenology and the theory of objects of Alexius Meinong, Ernst Mally, And the Graz school of philosophical semantics and psychology.
Twardowski offers four arguments to show that the content and object of a presentation can never be same. These conclusions are challenged by
a formal diagonal counterexample in which it is possible for the content and object of a thought to be precisely identical.
Twardowski's reduction and the act-Content-Object structure of psychological experience may nevertheless be upheld in somewhat different form
not as an exclusive but as a nonexclusive kind of distinction."
———. 1990. "The Origins of Gegenstandstheorie. Immanent and Transcendent Intentional objects in Brentano, Twardowski and Meinong." Brentano Studien.Internationales Jahrbuch der Franz Brentano Forschung no. 3:177-202.
———. 2006. "Twardowski, Brentano's Dilemma, and the Content-Object Distinction." In Actions, Products, and Things. Brentano and Polish
Philosophy, edited by Chrudzimski, Arkadiusz and Łukasiewicz, Dariusz, 9-34. Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.
Jadacki, Jacek Jusliuz. 1992. "The Metaphysical Basis of Kazimierz Twardowski's Descriptive Semiotics." In Theories of Objects: Meinong
and Twardowski, edited by Pasniczek, Jacek, 57-74. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Slodowskiej.
———. 1993. "Kazimierz Twardowski's Descriptive Semiotics." In Polish Scientific Philosophy: the Lvov-Warsaw School, edited by
Coniglione, Francesco, Poli, Roberto and Wolenski, Jan, 191-206. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
" Kazimierz Twardowski's contribution to semiotics has been fourfold: as a "critic" of others conceptions, a "constructor" of his own
analyses, distinctions, and theses, a "precursor" of new ideas and methods, and an "inspirer" of posterior polemics (especially in Lvov-Warsaw School). The
work bears the detail presentation of Twardowski's semiotic views, showing that his theory consists in the psycho-physical conception of signs, the functional
conception of expression, the noematic conception of sense, and the discrepant conception of language. The reach bibliography contains the list of 21
Twardowski's works on semiotics, and of 43 works on his views."
Jedynak, Anna. 2009. "French and Polish Conventionalism." In The Golden Age of Polish philosophy. Kazimierz Twardowski's Philosophical
Legacy, edited by Lapointe, Sandra, Wolenski, Jan, Marion, Mathieu and Miskiewicz, Wioletta, 61-77. New York: Springer.
Kleszcz, Ryszard 2016. "Kazimierz Twardowski on Metaphysics." In Tradition of the Lvov-Warsaw School. Ideas and Continuations,
edited by Brożek, Anna, Chybińska, Alicja, Jadacki, Jacek and Wolenski, Jan, 135-152. Leiden: Brill.
Kujundicz, Nebojsa. 2001. "On the Logic of Adjectives." Dialogue.Canadian Philosophical Review no. 40:803-809.
Lapointe, Sandra, Wolenski, Jan, Marion, Mathieu, and Miskiewicz, Wioletta, eds. 2009. The Golden Age of Polish Philosophy. Kazimierz
Twardowski's Philosophical Legacy. New York: Springer.
Contents: Acknowledgments V-VI; Sandra Lapointe, Jan Wolenski: Introduction 1; Part I. Twardowski and Polish scientific philosophy. 1.
Dariusz Łukasiewicz: Polish metaphysics and the Brentanian tradition 19; 2. Jerzy Bobryk: The genesis and history of Twardowski's theory of actions and
products 33; Jan Wolenski: The rise and development of logical semantics in Poland 43; Anna Jedynak: French and Polish conventionalism 61; Part II. Philosophy
of logic and mathematics. 5. Grzegorz Malinowski: A philosophy of many-valued logic. The third logical value and beyond 81; 6. Arianna Betti: Leśniewski's
systems and the Aristotelian model of science 93; 7. Denis Miéville: Leśniewski, negation, and the art of logical subtlety 113; 8. Roman Murawski: Philosophy
of mathematics in the Lvov-Warsaw School 121; 9. Paolo Mancosu: Tarski's engagement with philosophy 131; 10. Douglas Patterson: Tarski on definition, meaning
and truth 155; Part III. Polish Philosophy of Mind. 11. Urszula M. Zeglen: A note on Henryk Mehlberg's contribution to the debate on the mind-body problem 173;
12. Wioletta Miskiewicz: Leopold Blaustein's analytical phenomenology 181; Part IV. Around Twardowski's School. 13. Katarzyna Kijania-Placek: Non-classical
conceptions of truth in Polish philosophy at the beginning of the 20th century 191; 14. Bernard Linsky: Chwistek's theory of constructive types 203; 15. Claude
Panaccio: Konstanty Michalski on late medieval nominalism 221; 16. Roger Pouivet: Jan Samalucha's analytical Thomism 235; Index 247-251.
Łukasiewicz, Dariusz. 2009. "Polish Metaphysics and the Brentanian Tradition." In The Golden Age of Polish philosophy. Kazimierz
Twardowski's Philosophical Legacy, edited by Lapointe, Sandra, Wolenski, Jan, Marion, Mathieu and Miskiewicz, Wioletta, 19-31. New York: Springer.
Moltmann, Friederike. 2014. "Attitudinal Objects and the Distinction between Actions and Products." Canadian Journal of Philosophy
Pasniczek, Jacek, ed. 1992. Theories of Objects: Meinong and Twardowski. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii
Contents: Jacek Pasniczek: Preface 7; Francesca Modenato: Alexius Meinong: the theory of relation as a theory of knowledge 9; Liliana
Albertazzi: Is there a transcendental object? 26; Roberto Poli: Twardowski and Wolff 45; Jacek Juliusz Jadacki: The metaphysical basis of Kazimierz
Twardowski's descriptive semiotics 57; Jan Wolenski: 'Being' as a syncategorematic word: a completion (?) of Twardowski's analysis of 'nothing' 75; Dale
Jacquette: Meinongian models of scientific law 86; Jacek Pasniczek: The Meinongian logic vs. the Classical logic 105-112.
This volume contains a selection of papers from the conference "The Theory of Objects in Central Europe. The Austrian-Polish Connection:
Meinong and Twardowski" held in December 1989 in Kraków. It was supported and sponsored by the Jagiellonian University, Centro Studi per la Filosofia
Mitteleuropea, The National Research Project "Sign-Language-Reality", and The Institute of Austrian Culture in Warsaw. The conference was organized by Prof.
Jan Wolenski with dr. Georg Jankovic's generous assistance.
Alexius Meinong and Kazimierz Twardowski studied philosophy at the University of Vienna at the end of XIX century. Both were under a great
influence of Franz Brentano, who is considered the father of contemporary theory of intentionality. He viewed intentionality as the crucial feature of
consciousness consisting in „directness to an object". Such conception should presuppose some general theory of objects of consciousness. Meinong and
Twardowski adopted Brentano's idea of intentionality subsequently elaborating their own ontologies of objects. What is common in the views of the two
philosophers, barring many differences, is that they assume an extensive sphere of non-existent objects that can be possibly objects of intentional acts.
Nowadays there is a growing interest in theories of intentionality and intentional objects on the part of analytic philosophy as well as
phenomenology. That is why there is also a renaissance of Meinong's and Twardowski's philosophical thought, although the former philosopher is much better
known, more popular, and, what follows, more inspiring. The main purpose of the conference that took place in Kraków was to investigate, from various
historical and theoretical perspectives, theories of objects created by the two of Brentano's followers. It is to be regretted that the present volume does not
fill a serious gap in philosophical literature: no paper is devoted to direct comparison of Meinong and Twardowski. Nevertheless we hope that the papers
collected in the volume may contribute to better understanding of the two philosophers and prepare the ground for such a comparative study.
F. Modenato, in her essay, traces the development of Meinong's idea of relations while linking his views with the views of Hume and Locke.
She is concentrating on epistemological relevance of the idea. Relations are treated by Meinong as some complexities and both relations and complexities are
higher-order objects. Higher-order objects play the central role in Meinong's theory of knowledge and are of great importance to his ontology.
L. Albertazzi points to some Kantian motives in Twardowski's ontology. The Polish philosopher distinguishes several categories of objects
which, according to Albertazzi's interpretation, correspond closely to that distinguished by Kant. In particular, 'the object in general' may be taken as
Kant's transcendental object, and 'the general object' as a universal presented individually in the subject of proposition.
R. Poli argues in his paper that many elements of Wolff's ontology can be found in Twardowski's theory of objects. Both philosophers conceive
objects as possible wholes. For Twardowski, being an object is ontologically prior to having existence and it is enough for being an object to be representable
in an act of presentation.
J.J. Jadacki presents a comprehensive survey of Twardowski's ontological (metaphysical) and epistemological views. On this basis he
reconstructs the philosopher's descriptive semiotics focusing his attention on the theory of judgment.
Additionally, Jadacki carries out a formal semantic analysis of Twardowski's semiotics.
J. Wolenski considers the main traditional views of 'being' and wonders if 'being' could be situated somewhere in the formal hierarchy of
concepts. He comes to the conclusion that "being" expresses no concept at all and, what follows, it has the syncategorematic character as Twardowski claimed.
Wolenski proposes a completion of Twardowski's claim by appealing to modern logic and Leśniewski's ontology.
D. Jacquette sketches informally the principles of Meinongian semantics and shows how the semantics can be applied in formalisation of
scientific laws. By contrast to extensionalist models of scientific discourse which admit only existent objects, in Meinongian semantics the reference to ideal
and non-existent objects is possible. Many problems of contemporary philosophy of science such as, for example, the justification of induction and confirmation
can be uniformely treated and solved on the ground of Meinong's theory.
J. Pasniczek proposes quite a simple logic which obeys the main theses of Meinong's theory of objects. This logic resembles closely the
classical predicate logic with respect to syntax and semantics (it is basically extensional). Despite that resemblance, the proposed logic is associated with
very rich ontology of objects including various kinds of non-existent objects.
I am deeply indebted to Prof. Jan Wolenski for encouragement and assistance in editing this book." (Preface, pp. 7-8)
Placek, Tomasz. 1996. "Thought as a Product of Thinking." Conceptus.Zeitschrift für Philosophie no. 24:191-203.
"This paper advocates the view that thoughts which are qualitatively the same are also numerically identical. The point of departure is the
puzzle: if thoughts are unchanging and eternal inhabitants of a "third realm", then it is mysterious how we grasp them, whereas, the assumption that they are
outputs of some mental processes casts doubt on the possibility of communicating thoughts. To solve the puzzle Twardowski's teaching on actions and their
products is applied and further elaborated."
Poli, Roberto. 1992. "Twardowski and Wolff." In Theories of Objects: Meinong and Twardowski, edited by Pasniczek, Jacek, 45-56.
Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Slodowskiej.
———. 1993. "Twardowski's Theory of Modification Against the Background of Traditional Logic." Axiomathes no. 4:41-57.
———. 1996. "Kazimierz Twardowski (1866–1938)." In The School of Franz Brentano, edited by Albertazzi, Liliana, Libardi, Massimo and
Poli, Roberto, 207-231. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Rojszczak, Artur. 1998. "Truth-bearers from Twardowski to Tarski." In The Lvov-Warsaw School and Contemporary Philosophy, edited by
Kijania-Placek, Katarzyna and Wolenski, Jan, 73-84. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
———. 2005. From the Act of Judging to the Sentence. The Problem of Truth Bearers from Bolzano to Tarski. Dordrecht: Springer.
Rollinger, Robin D. 1999. Husserl's Position in the School of Brentano. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
See Chapter 5: Husserl and Twardowski, pp. 139-154.
———. 2009. "Brentano's Psychology and Logic and the Basis of Twardowski's Theory of Presentations." The Baltic International Yearbook of
Cognition, Logic and Communication:1-23.
Rosiak, Marek. 1998. "Twardowski and Husserl on Wholes and Parts." In The Lvov-Warsaw School and Contemporary Philosophy, edited by
Kijania-Placek, Katarzyna and Wolenski, Jan, 85-100. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Schaar, Maria van der. 1996. "From Analytic Psychology to Analytic Philosophy; the Reception of Twardowski’s Ideas in Cambridge." Axiomathes no. 4:295-324.
———. 2006. "On the Ambiguities of the Term Judgement. An Evaluation of Twardowski's Distinction between Action and Product." In Actions,
Products, and Things. Brentano and Polish Philosophy, edited by Chrudzimski, Arkadiusz and Łukasiewicz, Dariusz, 35-54. Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.
———. 2015. Kazimierz Twardowski: A Grammar for Philosophy. Leiden: Brill.
Schuhmann, Karl. 1993. "Husserl and Twardowski." In Polish Scientific Philosophy: the Lvov-Warsaw School, edited by Coniglione,
Francesco, Poli, Roberto and Wolenski, Jan, 41-58. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Simons, Peter M. 2009. "Twardowski on Truth." The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication no.
Simons, Peter M., and Wolenski, Jan. 1989. "De Veritate: Austro-Polish Contributions to the Theory of Truth from Brentano to
Tarski." In The Vienna Circle and the Lvov-Warsaw School, edited by Szaniawski, Klemens, 391-442. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Skolimowski, Henryk. 1967. Polish Analytical Philosophy. A Survey and a Comparison with British Analytical Philosophy. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Chapter II. Kazimierz Twardowski and the Rise of the Analytical Movement in Poland, pp. 24-55.
Smith, Barry. 1989. "Kazimir Twardowski: An Essay on the Borderlines of ontology, Psychology and logic." In The Vienna Circle and the
Lvov-Warsaw School, edited by Szaniawski, Klemens, 313-373. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
———. 1994. Austrian Philosophy. The Legacy of Franz Brentano. Chicago: Open Court.
See the Chapter: K asimir Twardowski: On content and object, pp. 160-195.
———. 2006. "Why Polish Philosophy Does Not Exist." In The Lvov-Warsaw School. The New Generation, edited by Jadacki, Jacek Jusliuz
and Pasniczek, Jacek, 19-40. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
"Why have Polish philosophers fared so badly as concerns their admission into the pantheon of "Continental philosophers?" Why, for example,
should Heidegger and Derrida be included in this pantheon, but not Ingarden or Tarski? Why, to put the question from another side, should there be so close an
association in Poland between philosophy and logic, and between philosophy and science? We distinguish a series of answers to this question, which are dealt
with under the following headings: (a) the role of socialism; (b) the disciplinary association between philosophy and mathematics; (c) the influence of
Austrian philosophy in general and of Brentanian philosophy in particular; (d) the serendipitous role of Twardowski; (e) the role of Catholicism. The
conclusion of the paper is that there is no such thing as 'Polish philosophy' because philosophy in Poland is philosophy per se, it is part and parcel of the
mainstream of world philosophy -- simply because, in contrast to French or German philosophy, it meets international standards of training, rigour,
professionalism and specialization."
Vasyukov, Vladimir L. 1998. "Non-Elementary Exegesis of Twardowski's Theory of Presentations." In The Lvov-Warsaw School and Contemporary
Philosophy, edited by Kijania-Placek, Katarzyna and Wolenski, Jan, 153-167. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
"In spite of the historical proximity of S. Leśniewski to K. Twardowski, ari attempt to look at Twardowski's heritage through Leśniewski's
eyes leads to striking results. Firstly, it results in a wider framework than Leśniewski's Elementary Ontology and secondly, it involves a transition from
Formal Ontology to Formai Phenomenology. In this paper an extension of Leíniewskis's Non-Elementary Ontology is presented which is suitable for investìgating
Twardowski's Theory of Presentation."
Vinogradov, Evgeni G. 1998. "The Rationalistic Paradigm of Franz Brentano and Kazimierz Twardowski." In The Lvov-Warsaw School and
Contemporary Philosophy, edited by Kijania-Placek, Katarzyna and Wolenski, Jan, 101-104. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Wolenski, Jan. 1989. Logic and Philosophy in the Lvov-Warsaw School. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
———. 1992. "'Being' as a Syncategorematic Word: A Completion (?) of Twardowski's Analysis of 'Nothing'." In Theories of Objects: Meinong
and Twardowski, edited by Pasniczek, Jacek, 75-85. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Slodowskiej.
———. 1999. "Twardowski and the Distinction between Content and Object." Brentano Studien.Internationales Jahrbuch der Franz Brentano
Forschung no. 8:15-36.
"The content/object distinction was the main philosophical result achieved by Twardowski. However, he had predecessors. This paper discusses
the development of the mentioned distinction from Bolzano to Twardowski. Views of Zimmermann, Brentano, Meinong, Höfler are taken into account; also some
objections of Husserl against Twardowski are discussed and evaluated. The paper also stresses the general philosophical significance of Twardowski's work."
———. 2002. "From Intentionality to Formal Semantics (From Twardowski To Tarski)." Erkenntnis no. 56:9-27.
"This paper intends to show that the rise of semantics in Poland was related to Kazimierz Twardowski and his understanding of mental acts as
intentional (in Brentano's understanding plus the principally realistic conception of intentional objects). Twardowski's theory of language was consequently
semantic considering words as products of mental acts and as referring to the world. This view was then refined by Twardowski's students, in particular
Stanislaw Leśniewski and Tadeusz Kotarbinski. Both were teachers of Alfred Tarski, the founder of modern formal semantics. These facts suggest that the
intentional conception of language was an important philosophical context of Tarski's work."
———. 2009. "The Rise and Sevelopment of Logical Semantics in Poland." In The Golden Age of Polish philosophy. Kazimierz Twardowski's
Philosophical Legacy, edited by Lapointe, Sandra, Wolenski, Jan, Marion, Mathieu and Miskiewicz, Wioletta, 43-59. New York: Springer.