Článek je věnován roli intersubjektivity ve filosofii Karla Jasperse. Autor se zaměřuje především na 3. kapitolu z Philosophie II, kde Jaspers podává nejpodrobnější výklad různých podob komunikace. Detailní rozbor základních způsobů komunikace, jež odpovídají různým úrovním lidského Já, zároveň umožňuje objasnit původ nedostatečnosti a selhávání, k nimž dochází v komunikaci, pokud se nepozvedla na úroveň existenciální komunikace. Zvláštní pozornost je věnována právě existenciální komunikaci a jejímu významu v procesu stávání se sebou. Autor zastává tezi, že zejména v pasážích osvětlujících závažné metafyzické důsledky, jež plynou ze selhávání v komunikaci, Jaspers rozvíjí implicitní polemiku s Martinem Heideggerem, v jehož analýzách autentického pobytu intersubjektivita nehraje žádnou roli. V závěru pak autor poukazuje na souvislosti mezi existenciální komunikací a mezní situací boje., The article focuses on the role of intersubjectivity in the philosophy of Karl Jaspers, concentrating above all on the third chapter of Philosophy, Vol. II in which Jaspers gives his most detailed exposition of the various forms of communication. At the same time, a detailed analysis of the basic modes of communication – which correspond to the different levels of the human self – facilitates our understanding the origin of the inadequacies and failures that occur in communication when it has not risen to the level of existential communication. Special attention is given to existential communication and its importance in the process of becoming oneself. The author argues that, especially in those passages that highlight the serious metaphysical consequences that follow from failures in communication, Jaspers is developing an implicit polemic with Martin Heidegger (in whose analyzes of authentic Dasein intersubjectivity played no role). In the conclusion, the author points out the connection between existential communication and the boundary situation of struggle., and Der vorliegende Artikel ist der Rolle der Intersubjektivität in der Philosophie Karl Jaspers’ gewidmet. Der Autor befasst sich insbesondere mit dem 3. Kapitel der Philosophie II, in dem Jaspers eine detaillierte Auslegung zu verschiedenen Formen der Kommunikation bietet. Die eingehende Analyse der grundlegenden Kommunikationsformen, die den unterschiedlichen Ebenen des menschlichen Ich entsprechen, ermöglicht gleichfalls die Klärung des Ursprungs von Unzulänglichkeit und Versagen, die in der Kommunikation auftreten, wenn diese nicht die Ebene der existenziellen Kommunikation erreicht. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit wird hier gerade der existenziellen Kommunikation und deren Bedeutung im Prozess der Selbstwerdung gewidmet. Der Autor argumentiert, dass Jaspers insbesondere in den Passagen, in denen die aus dem Versagen von Kommunikation sich ergebenden schwerwiegenden metaphysischen Folgen erläutert werden, eine implizite Polemik mit Martin Heidegger entwickelt, in dessen Analysen des authentischen Daseins die Intersubjektivität keine Rolle spielt. Abschließend verweist der Autor auf den Zusammenhang zwischen existenzieller Kommunikation und der Grenzsituation des Kampfes.
After the First Partition of Poland, another crown land - Galicia (German: Galizien, Polish: Galicja, Ukrainian: Halychyna) was incorporated into the Austrian Empire; it covered current south-Polish and western-Ukrainian territories north of the Carpathians in the basin of the Vistula to Upper Dniester and Prut. Galicia featured not only a variety of ethnic groups living in it (Polish, Ukrainians, Jews, Germans, Armenians, etc.), but also a diversity in religions. The above-mentioned ethnic and religious differences were reflected in the cultural sphere whose richness of expressions drew attention of the first collectors of folk traditions among domestic authors and foreign researchers, whereby Balthasar Hacquet (1739–1815) can be mentioned as the first of them. The interest of researchers whose attention was directed rather to the National Revival and who saw in the folk culture the roots of national self-identity was based on different ideological premises. It was Pavel Josef Šafařík (1795–1861) who became the representative of Slavic ethnography and who - in cooperation with the Ukrainian (Malorossian) scholars Ivan D. Vahylevych and Jakov Holovacki - offered knowledge about Ukrainian (Ruthenian) culture in eastern Galicia. Karel František Vladislav Zap (1812–1871) was among significant Czech experts in Galicia; as a public servant he lived in Lviv at the turn of the 1830s and 1840s. His work features an effort for a critical but unbiased attitude to ethnical and economic problems of the country. The freer social life in Austria after the fall of Bach’s absolutism lead to the development of journalism. The ethnographic work of František Řehoř (1857–1899), who spent several years in the region, is of essential importance for Galicia. He published his essays, mostly of a popularizing nature, in Prague social and professional journals. His strengths included gathering of source material through field research, and collecting activities. The last important chapter of contact between Ukrainians from Galicia and the Czech lands dates back to the 1890s; it is connected with large exhibitions held in Prague and Lviv. However, the political situation in the Austro-Hungarian Empire caused their reception to be diametrically opposed. World War I, the dissolution of Austria-Hungary and the formation of the successor states ended the flow of ethnographic journalism on Galicia for the Czech reader; the Czech-Ukrainian contacts continued, however, on a different basis.