Funkcje cudu jako znaku

Rusecki, Marian

Theo-logos
→
Czasopisma naukowe
→
Roczniki Teologiczno-Kanoniczne
→
Roczniki Teologiczno-Kanoniczne, 1980, T. 27, z. 2
→
Zobacz pozycję

dc.contributor.author	Rusecki, Marian
dc.date.accessioned	2023-08-29T06:58:30Z
dc.date.available	2023-08-29T06:58:30Z
dc.date.issued	1980
dc.identifier.citation	Roczniki Teologiczno-Kanoniczne, 1980, T. 27, z. 2, s. 51-70.	pl_PL
dc.identifier.issn	0035-7723
dc.identifier.uri	http://repozytorium.theo-logos.pl/xmlui/handle/123456789/10241
dc.description	In the raditionail apologetics the functions of miracle were confined only to evidential. The author refutes this, since mniracle viewed in the cathegories of a sign cannot have the functions of a proof, and also proving in the strict sense is impossibile in the field of apologetics and theology. On the basis of P. Guiraud’s conception of sign and its function, the author educes the functions of micracle-sign from its nature. Up till now they have been educed in a rather free way, either from an analysis of biblical terms defining miracle, or they were deduced from its transcendence, or by applying the cathegory of sign to miracle without analyzing more closely the structure of sign. Every sign has six structural elements: the denoted and denoting elements, the producer and recipient, the reference and the code. Hence sign has at least five functions resulting from the relations between particular elements: the function of reference – it refers the material element to the meaning; the emotive function – it defines the relation between the producer and the message, the fatic function – has the role of communication between the producer and the recipient, and the metalinguistic function, defining the sense of the sign, which is done by relating the sign to the code. Miracle viewed as a sign has analogous functions. Hence it follows, that miracle has manifold functions from its very nature. The author concludes, that miracles are coded in the revelation with respect to the form and contents, they go into its structure, they are one of the forms (this decides the question, if theology should still deal with miracles), and this is why miracles should be interpreted on the basis of the code-revelation, which finally defines their sense.	pl_PL
dc.language.iso	pl	pl_PL
dc.publisher	Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego	pl_PL
dc.rights	Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Poland	*
dc.rights.uri	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/pl/	*
dc.subject	cuda	pl_PL
dc.subject	miracles	pl_PL
dc.subject	znak	pl_PL
dc.subject	sign	pl_PL
dc.subject	funkcje cudów	pl_PL
dc.subject	functions of miracles	pl_PL
dc.subject	funkcje znaku	pl_PL
dc.subject	functions of the sign	pl_PL
dc.subject	Pierre Guiraud	pl_PL
dc.subject	teologia	pl_PL
dc.subject	theology	pl_PL
dc.subject	apologetyka	pl_PL
dc.subject	apologetics	pl_PL
dc.subject	semiologia	pl_PL
dc.subject	semiology	pl_PL
dc.title	Funkcje cudu jako znaku	pl_PL
dc.title.alternative	Functions of miracle as a sign	pl_PL
dc.type	Article	pl_PL