The paper contains advanced statistical analysis, original methods and a significant contribution to the claim that measurement of reflexivity is possible. It is based on original empirical research using a sample of 334 students from different faculties and educational levels. It utilises a qualitative questionnaire containing a 4-level reflexivity scale, designed by Kember et al. (2000), translated into the Polish language and context. The aim of the study was to identify whether students’ reflexivity levels can be associated with the level of their study, taking into account possible masking effects of their age. Differences were tested for faculty and system of training (full time or part-time). Analysis confirms the strongest relation between reflexive thinking, system of tuition and level of studies. There was no connection found between reflexive thinking and the faculty of study or the respondents’ gender.

Stop and think. Thinking against fanaticism

Piotr Kowzan’s polemic proved that the issue of fanaticism remains an important educational problem, but also more broadly: a social one. Formulating a response to a polemic allows for rethinking and clarifying some themes. It also turns out to be important to return to the very definition of fanaticism as well as to point out that the problem is important because fanaticism threatens primarily people of value: those who perceive values and are actively engaged in their realization. In our response to the polemic, we try to point out three issues that are important in our opinion. Firstly, we emphasize that fanaticism is always harmful, and although this harmfulness is not always significant, even in the best case, fanaticism is harmful at least to the fanatic himself. Secondly, we oppose the claim that countering fanaticism can be as destructive as fanaticism itself. Thirdly, we maintain the claim that the basic symptoms of fanaticism are: an inability to make any compromises and a rejection of the very possibility of making an exception to an accepted rule of action. In conclusion, we recall Hannah Arend’s vitally important call to maintain a balance between activity and reflexivity.

A person’s individuality as the source of coping with uncertainty and risk. Reflection of Jan Szczepański’s individuality conception in connection with current mindfulness techniques

The paper attempts to answer the question: how could human individuality be a resource making it possible to cope with the experience of feeling uncertainty and risk? Jan Szczepański’s idea of individuality defines the structure and functions of that dimension of the human condition. It tries to explain the sense of man’s inner world and their reflexivity in struggling with the negative consequences due to the social organisation of collective life. An analytic view of individuality included in this concept allows for revealing the emergency nature of personal identity affected by dialogue between the inner world and the internalised outside world. The discussed concept might increase the attempt to synthesise it with the vision of mindfulness. The effect of it is a unique underlining role of loneliness in the individual process of human development and captures the moral character of individuality (hipo-egoic phenomena).