Abstract
The paper contains the polemics and refers to certain doubts that Maurycy Zaje˛cki presented in his paper. Responding to them, Marek Smolak formulated the following three remarks. Firstly, he accepts the postulate that presuppositions should be divided into, as proposed by M. Zaje˛cki, brute and institutional presuppositions. Secondly, contrary to M. Zaje˛cki’s view, the author of this paper argues that a certain fact is indeed an institutional fact even when, based on mutual expectations, only two persons recognise it as a fact. Thirdly, the author emphasises the fact that the truthfulness of the existence of institutional facts presupposed in a legal text depends on their social acceptance.License
Copyright (c) 2018 WPiA UAM
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.