The conception of the non-dualizing model of interpretation formulated by Josef Mitterer, is representative for his philosophy of the non-dualizing way of speaking. Founded on the anti-essentialistic and anti-ontologizing assumptions, non-dualizing model of interpretation – in opposition to the dualizing model – assumes that the interpretation starts from the text which functions as the interpretation so far changed in the interpretation from now. The aim of the interpretation – understood as a process – is the change, not the truth. As the consequence, plurality of interpretation is preferred in the opposition to the notion of the only one, true or adequate interpretation. In the situation of conflicts in which there are at least two concurrent interpretation, the non-dualizing logic prefers the formulation of new descriptions to which there could be reached a kind of compromise. We do not activate the other side of the discourse as the authority which is able to solve the conflict.

This model of interpretation provokes some critical remarks, for example: the problem of the (potential) differences between description and interpretation, the notion of change as the aim of the interpretational process, the way in which new descriptions are established and stabilized. However, the non-dualizing model of interpretation seems to be an interesting option for dualizing discourses of the contemporary humanistic.

To say that we are losing ourselves in the homogenizing mass which is consuming the same products sold around the globe would be a simplification. In the example of K-pop, I am trying to delineate the ways in which creative consumption makes corporations comply with the local traditions and the tastes of individual consumers in developing effective marketing strategies. Indeed, the power of cultural diversity does not consist in being isolated from pop culture, but it results from the nature of consumption practices, because it does matter to people what things they creatively consume and how they do this. This work is an important part of the process of identity formation.

The widespread use of Thomas Alva Edison’s device significantly changed the process of listening at the end of 19th century and 20th century. Still, today we listen to technologically re-produced sound. The article analyses the technology and historical context of developing this medium. I refer to Friedrich Kittlers work presenting the phonograph and later gramophone as a dysfunctional human apparatus – a passive device that records everything, without filtering the vibration and the context of scientific experiment made it a fact. I analyse Edison Company promotional strategies and actions referring to categories of liveness, dysfunction and sound representation.

Art Spiegelman’s comic book Maus was the inspiration for Marianne Hirsch during the work over the concept of Post-memory. As far as “generation memory” and question of trauma seems to be the crucial element of narration, interesting interpretation field is connected also with “animal metaphor”. In context of relation between “human”–“animal”–”unhuman” the article with usage of case study is attempting to analyse the reasons and consequences of chosen visual representation and its ethical adequacy. Additionally is the attempt to answer the question where is located the border between “human being” and “animal” in contemporary philosophy and description of its political character.

“The literature holds on firmly! And the literary science with it!” These are the first two sentences of the Adam F. Kola’s article ANT-ologia literatury (“Przegląd Kulturoznawczy” 2013, no. 1, p. 35). However, on could argue about the dependence on literature apparently innate to the literary science and the directly proportional relationship between them: the stronger is the first one, the stronger is the second. The literary science became on a large scale independent from the literature and its power derives from its bureaucratic status. Cyril Northcote Parkinson (“the rising pyramid” of bureaucracy) allows us to see the institutional foundation of the literary science independent from the literature.