Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Czechoslovak praxeology—a discipline that did not exist?

  • Published:
Studies in East European Thought Aims and scope Submit manuscript

You are indeed tireless in your efforts to inform Czechoslovak society about our science, and I am sure that this is of great benefit both to the development of organisation and management science and to social practice in both our countries.

Jan Zieleniewski to Alois Glogar and Jindřich Pytela, 15 February 1971 (Zieleniewski 1971a, p. 1)

Czechs and Slovaks are practical people and therefore want practical applications more than theory … . The possibilities of practical application are the best advertisement for increasing interest in this new science.

Bohuslav Staněk to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, 24 May 1969 (Staněk 1969b, p. 2)

Abstract

On the basis of contemporary Czech and Slovak texts and correspondence between Czechoslovak scientists and Polish praxeologists, the study shows how praxeology, a scientific discipline that deals with human action and is primarily associated with the Polish environment and the prominent philosopher Tadeusz Kotarbiński (1886–1981), was viewed in Czechoslovakia in the 1960s and 1970s. The analysis also defines the factors that shaped the newly emerging “Czechoslovak” praxeology. One such factor was Polish–Czechoslovak (or rather Czech–Polish and Slovak–Polish) scientific relations, especially contacts with the Institute of Praxeology of the Polish Academy of Sciences. The article argues that a specific “national” form of Czechoslovak praxeology crystallised in Czechoslovakia around the turn of the 1970s. Although it was based on the Polish model, the habitus of certain Czechoslovak scholars to draw on works of Marxism–Leninism, the involvement of communist ideologues in the debate about the form and future of praxeology, and the historical context of the emerging normalisation after 1968 made Czechoslovak praxeology a peculiar mix of original Polish ideas and Czechoslovak scientific practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This correspondence has been preserved on the Polish side because Polish praxeologists were prominent figures in Polish science, and their papers are now stored in Polish archives and libraries.

  2. For the English edition, see: Richta et al. (1969b).

  3. This letter is also stored in Kotarbiński’s collection at the Archives of the National Library in Warsaw.

  4. Jiří Kotýnek (b. 1936) was an economist, had a Polish wife and was involved in the Klub Polski in Prague. After 1970, he had difficulty finding work in his profession (Korzenie 2024).

  5. The print run of the book was 4000, at least according to the information in the book. See Zieleniewski (1967), p. 512.

  6. The letter does not specify whether the books were bought by students or university officials.

  7. The reason for its non-publication was allegedly “lack of interest on the part of the Czechoslovak publishing house”. See Zieleniewski (1971b). One reason may have been that the text was translated by Dušan Slávik (1922–1992), a fighter in the Slovak National Uprising (1944) and an anti-communist politician imprisoned in the 1950s who became a dissident and persona non-grata after 1968.

  8. Alois Glogar worked at the Technological Faculty of the University of Technology in Gottwaldov, where he focused on the theory of organisation and management. In 1969, he was prohibited from teaching, but he continued to work at the faculty. In the 1990s, he played a key role in establishing the Faculty of Management and Economics at the University of Technology and served as its inaugural dean.

  9. Jidřich Pytela supported the reformist economist Ota Šik in the 1960s and was expelled from the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia in 1970.

  10. Later, Křížka became chairman of the Central Section for Praxeology of the Committee for Scientific Management within the Czech Scientific and Technical Society. He lived in Southern Moravia.

  11. Because of his (reformist) views in 1968, Miroslav Janek was prevented from completing his doctorate at the Institute of Sociology of the Slovak Academy of Sciences after the beginning of normalisation.

  12. The Slovak translation of a lecture Kotarbiński gave in June, 1969 in Bratislava, at the Department of Logic and the Cabinet of Methodology of Sciences of the Faculty of Arts of Comenius University, was published in the Slovak journal Filozofia in 1971 (cf. Kotarbiński 1971). It was the first Slovak translation of a praxeological text by T. Kotarbiński.

  13. The Slovak translation of Mreła’s work Jak organizować zakład pracy (How to organise a workplace) was published in Slovak in 1974 (Mreła 1974). The Czech translation of his work Dyrektor jako organizator (Director as organiser) was published four years later (Mreła 1978). However, Mrela’s first translations were published in Czechoslovakia in the 1960s (Mreła 1969).

  14. On the content of the 3rd praxeological seminar in Gottwaldov, see Glogar ed. (1977).

  15. See, for example: Mošner and Zvara (1966, p. 336); Kučera (1967, p. 30). This approach persisted until the 1970s. See: Mužík (1975, p. 26).

  16. Kučera also highlighted Lenin’s contribution in the aforementioned introduction to Kotarbiński’s Praxeology (Kučera 1972, p. 7).

  17. Staněk sent a copy of his letter to Tadeusz Pszczołowski and also to Kotarbiński and Zieleniewski.

  18. Kotarbiński’s collection in the Polish National Library also contains the text of the study “Praxeology and Teleology” in Czech translation.

  19. For example, Jindřich Srovnal, František Šamalík, Bohuslav Staněk and Dušan Slávik.

References

  • Bustinová, Katarína. 1972. Praxeológia. Odborná bibliografia [Praxeology. Specialised bibliography]. Bratislava: Ústredná knižnica SAV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chroustovský, Jiří. 1970. Zahajovací slovo Ing. J. Chroustovského [Introductory speech by Ing. J. Chroustovský]. In Praxeologie a její využití v řídící práci. Sborník ze semináře, eds. Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar, 9–11. Gottwaldov: Oblastní odbočka ČKVŘ v Gottwaldově.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cmorej, Pavel. 1971. Tadeusz Kotarbiński 85-ročný [Tadeusz Kotarbiński 85 years old]. Filozofia 26: 82–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glogar, Alois. 1970. Praxeologie a její využití v řídící práci [Praxeology and its use in managerial work]. Zpravodaj ČKVŘ 6: 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glogar, Alois, ed. 1977. Za vyšší efektivnost a kvalitu veškeré práce: sborník z celostáního semináře s mezinárodní účastí, 3. praxeologického semináře, Gottwaldov, prosinec 1977 [For greater efficiency and quality of all work: proceedings of a national seminar with international participation, 3rd praxeological seminar, Gottwaldov, December 1977]. Gottwaldov: Česká vědeckotechnická společnost.

  • Glogar, Alois, and Miroslav Tomáš. 1977. Prakseologia w Czechosłowacji [Praxeology in Czechoslovakia]. Prakseologia 61–62: 619–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Głombik, Czesław. 2010. Z historie polských setkání s Janem Patočkou [From the history of Polish meetings with Jan Patočka]. Studia philosophica 57: 47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Głombik, Czesław. 2016. O mniej znanych związkach polskich filozofów z Janem Patočką [On the lesser-known relations of Polish philosophers with Jan Patočka]. In Studia z filozofii polskiej. Tom 11, eds. Marek Rembierz and Krzysztof Śleziński, 119–134. Czeszyn – Kraków: Scriptum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hýsek, Jan. 1970. Co nového v praxeologii [What is new in praxeology]. Nová mysl 24: 430–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieżun, Witold. 1974. Organizace práce ředitele [Organisation of the director’s work]. Praha: Svoboda.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korzenie. 2024. Korzenie. Pod wspólnym dachem [Roots. Under a common roof]. Klub Polski w Pradze. https://www.klubpolski.cz/materialy/korzenie.pdf. Accessed 8 March 2024.

  • Kotarbiński, Tadeusz. 1959. Cíle praxeologie: Přednáška v Československé akademii věd 26. listopadu 1959 [Objectives of praxeology: lecture at the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, 26 November 1959]. Praha: Nakladatelství Československé akademie věd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotarbiński, Tadeusz. 1971. Úlohy a problémy praxeológie [Tasks and problems of praxeology]. Filozofia 26: 14–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotarbiński, Tadeusz. 2003. Dzieła wszystkie. Prakseologia II [Complete Works. Praxeology II]. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kryszewski, Włodzimierz, and Tadeusz Pszczołowski. 2022. Prakseologia [Praxeology]. Encyklopedia PWN. https://encyklopedia.pwn.pl/haslo/prakseologia;4009631.html. Accessed 10 November 2022.

  • Kučera, Jaroslav. 1967. Praxeologie – teoretická součást vědeckého řízení [Praxeology – the theoretical element of scientific management]. Nová mysl 21: 30–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kučera, Jaroslav. 1969a. Víte, co je praxeologie? (1) [Do you know what praxeology is?]. Rudé právo, 5 September 1969, p. 3.

  • Kučera, Jaroslav. 1969b. Víte, co je praxeologie? (2) [Do you know what praxeology is?]. Rudé právo, 9 September 1969, p. 3.

  • Kučera, Jaroslav. 1970a. K otázkám politických a ideologických aspektů praxeologie. Diskusní příspěvek Ing. Jaroslava Kučery [On the political and ideological aspects of praxeology. Discussion paper by Ing. Jaroslav Kučera]. In Praxeologie a její využití v řídící práci. Sborník ze semináře, eds. Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar, 85–90. Gottwaldov: Oblastní odbočka ČKVŘ v Gottwaldově.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kučera, Jaroslav. 1970b. Praxeologie – teorie praktické zkušenosti [Praxeology – theory of practical experience]. Odbory a společnost 2: 71–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kučera, Jaroslav. 1972. Předmluva [Foreword]. In Praxeologie, ed. Tadeusz Kotarbiński, 5–12. Praha: Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löwit, Vladimír. 1969. Lenin a praxeologie [Lenin and praxeology]. Život strany 38: 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mošner, Otakar, and Juraj Zvara. 1966. Porada o teórii organizácie a politiky [Meeting on Organisation Theory and Politics]. Filozofia 21: 336–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mošner, Otakar. 1966. Z poľských praxeologických štúdií [From Polish praxeological studies]. Filozofia 21: 639–642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mreła, Henryk. 1969. Projektovanie organizácie výrobných procesov v priemyselných závodoch [Designing the organisation of production processes in industrial enterprises]. Bratislava: Práca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mreła, Henryk. 1974. Organizácia práce podniku [Organisation of the work of the enterprise]. Bratislava: Práca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mreła, Henryk. 1978. Organizátorská práce vedoucího [Organizational work of the manager]. Praha: Svoboda.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mužík, Josef. 1975. Jednota empirie, teorie a praxe v poznávací činnosti strany [The unity of empirics, theory and practice in the party’s cognitive activity]. Filozofický časopis 23: 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naše pravda. 1969. Do Polska [To Poland], Naše pravda, 18 November 1969.

  • Naše pravda. 1972. O praxeologii [About praxeology], Naše pravda, 1 December 1972.

  • Naše pravda. 1977. Efektivnost a kvalitu [Efficiency and quality], Naše pravda, 20 December 1977.

  • Nowik, Edward. 1967. Úvahy o moderním stylu velení [Reflections on the modern command style]. In Moderní encyklopedie A-revue, 175–216. Praha: Vydavatelství časopisů MNO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odbory. 1970. První praxeologický seminář v ČSSR [First praxeological seminar in Czechoslovakia]. Odbory a společnost 1: 90–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrožilíková, Miloslava. 1970. Problematika praxeologie v duševní činnosti člověka [Issues of praxeology in human mental activity]. In Praxeologie a její využití v řídící práci. Sborník ze semináře, eds. Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar, 120–122. Gottwaldov: Oblastní odbočka ČKVŘ v Gottwaldově.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrusek, Miloslav. 1970. Praxeologie [Praxeology]. In Malý sociologický slovník, 323–325. Praha: Svoboda.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrusek, Miloslav. 2018. Praxeologie [Praxeology]. Sociologická encyklopedie. https://encyklopedie.soc.cas.cz/w/Praxeologie. Last modified 10 November 2018.

  • Přehledná. 1971. Přehledná publikace o praxeologii [An overview publication on praxeology]. Věda a život 5: 301–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pszczołowski, Tadeusz. 1976. Pravidla účinného jednání: Úvod do praxeologie [Principles of effective action: an introduction to praxeology]. Praha: Mladá fronta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pytela, Jindřich and Alois Glogar, eds. 1970a. Praxeologie a její využití v řídící práci. Sborník ze semináře [Praxeology and its use in management work. Proceedings of the seminar]. Gottwaldov: Oblastní odbočka ČKVŘ v Gottwaldově.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pytela, Jindřich. 1970. Poznámka k cestě polské praxeologie k českému čtenáři [A note on the path of Polish praxeology to the Czech reader]. In Praxeologie a její využití v řídící práci. Sborník ze semináře, eds. Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar, 104–108. Gottwaldov: Oblastní odbočka ČKVŘ v Gottwaldově.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richta, Radovan, et al.. 1969a. Civilizace na rozcestí: společenské a lidské souvislosti vědeckotechnické revoluce [Civilization at the crossroads: social and human implications of the scientific and technological revolution]. Praha: Svoboda.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riegl, Karel. 1971. Praxeologie a její využití v řídící práci [Praxeology and its use in managerial work]. Psychologie v ekonomické praxi 6: 109–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richta, Radovan, et al.. 1969b. Civilization at the crossroads: social and human implications of the scientific and technological revolution. Prague: International Arts and Science Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sedláček, Jan. 1966. Praxeologie [Praxeology]. In Stručný filozofický slovník, 352. Praha: Svoboda.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stádník, Miloš. 1939. Několik příspěvků k sporu o metodu v teorii národního hospodářství [Some Contributions to the Method Controversy in National Economic Theory]. Sborník věd právních a státních 39: 48–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staněk, Bohuslav. 1964. T. Pszczołowski: “Zasady sprawnego działania (Wstęp do Prakseologii)”. Podniková organizace 18: 528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaněk, Vlastimil. 1970. O praxeologii. Ze zkušenosti polských odborníků [About praxeology. From the experience of Polish experts]. Noviny zahraničního obchodu 8(7): 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Věda. 1965. Věda o racionální činnosti [Science of rational action]. Lidová demokracie, 22 October 1965.

  • Vůjtěch, Jan. 1970. Možnosti využití praxeologie [Possibilities of using praxeology]. Noviny zahraničního obchodu 8(10): 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehrstedt, Wolfgang, and Kurd Alsleben, eds. 1966. Praxeologie [Praxeology], Quickborn: Schnelle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zieleniewski, Jan. 1966a. Organizace lidských kolektivů [Organisation of human collectives]. Lidová armáda 15(22–26): Appendix.

  • Zieleniewski, Jan. 1967. Teorie organizace a řízení [Theory of organisation and management]. Praha: Svoboda.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zieleniewski, Jan. 1970a. Aktuální stav a úspěchy polské praxeologie a teorie organizace [Current state and achievements of Polish praxeology and organization theory]. In Praxeologie a její využití v řídící práci. Sborník ze semináře, eds. Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar, 13–34. Oblastní odbočka ČKVŘ v Gottwaldově.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zieleniewski, Jan. 1970b. O praxeologii [About praxeology]. Moderní řízení 5(6): 15–16.

    Google Scholar 

Archive references

    Archives of the Polish Academy of Sciences (Warsaw), Collection Jan Zieleniewski

    • Janek. 1970. Letter from Miroslav Janek to Jan Zieleniewski, Bratislava, 10 December 1970.

    • Pytela and Glogar. 1970b. Letter from Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar to Jan Zieleniewski, Gottwaldov, 15 October 1970.

    • Pytela and Glogar. 1970c. Letter from Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar to Jan Zieleniewski, Gottwaldov, 19 November 1970.

    • Pytela and Glogar. 1971. Letter from Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar to Jan Zieleniewski, Gottwaldov, 3 February 1971.

    • Staněk. 1972a. Letter from Bohuslav Staněk to Tadeusz Pszczołowski, Brno, 1 March 1972.

    • Staněk. 1972c. Letter from Bohuslav Staněk to Tadeusz Pszczołowski, Brno, 8 May 1972.

    • Staněk. 1973. Letter from Bohuslav Staněk to Witold Kieżun, 28 September 1973.

    • Zieleniewski. 1966b. Report on a trip to Czechoslovakia, 25 February 1966.

    • Zieleniewski. 1971a. Letter from Jan Zieleniewski to Jindřich Pytela and Alois Glogar, 15 February 1971.

    • Zieleniewski. 1971b. Letter from Jan Zieleniewski to Jindřich Pytela, 1 April 1971.

    National Library of Poland (Warsaw), Collection Tadeusz Kotarbiński

    • Berka. 1972. Letter from Karel Berka to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, Prague, 5 May 1972.

    • Křížka. 1966. Letter from Josef Křížka to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, Veselí nad Moravou, 28 December 1966.

    • Křížka. 1967. Letter from Josef Křížka to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, Veselí nad Moravou, 30 December 1967.

    • Křížka. 1969. Letter from Josef Křížka to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, Veselí nad Moravou, 27 December 1969.

    • Šáda. 1971. Letter from Emilián Šáda to the journal Teorie a metoda, Prague, 20 November 1971.

    • Šáda. 1972. Letter from Emilián Šáda to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, Prague, 27 March 1972.

    • Schoth. 1971. Letter from Otto Schoth to Bohuslav Staněk, Berlin, 20 May 1971.

    • Staněk 1969a. Letter from Bohuslav Staněk to Vilibald Bezdíček (copy), 25 March 1969.

    • Staněk. 1969b. Letter from Bohuslav Staněk to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, Brno, 24 May 1969.

    • Staněk. 1969c. Letter from Bohuslav Staněk to Gustáv Husák (copy), May 1969.

    • Staněk. 1972b. Letter from Bohuslav Staněk to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, 6 May 1972.

    • Staněk. 1974. Letter from Bohuslav Staněk to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, Brno, 3 March 1974.

    Masaryk Institute and Archives of the CAS (Prague), Collection Institute of Philosophy of the CSAS

    • Kutta. 1966. Letter from František Kutta to Tadeusz Kotarbiński, 15 July 1966, box 13, sign. 688, inv. no. 131.

    Collection Cabinet of Theory and Methodology of Science of the CSAS

    • Tondl. 1969a. Ladislav Tondl: Report on the visit and meeting of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw on 1–5 December 1969, box 3, inv. no. 47, sing. 655.

    • Tondl. 1969b. Ladislav Tondl: Report on the visit of Jan Zieleniewski to the Cabinet of Theory and Methodology of Science of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, box 4, inv. no. 72, sing. 67.

    • Tondl. 1970. Ladislav Tondl: Report on a trip to Poland, 14–16 December 1970, box 3, inv. no. 47, sing. 655.

    Download references

    Funding

    The study was funded by the Czech Science Foundation (GAČR), project No. GF21-45624L.

    Author information

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Masaryk Institute and Archives of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic

      Michaela Šmidrkalová

    Authors
    1. Michaela Šmidrkalová
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Michaela Šmidrkalová.

    Ethics declarations

    Competing Interests

    The author declares no competing interests.

    Additional information

    Publisher’s Note

    Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

    Rights and permissions

    Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Šmidrkalová, M. Czechoslovak praxeology—a discipline that did not exist?. Stud East Eur Thought (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-024-09638-1

    Download citation

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-024-09638-1

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation