Thus, when the University of Lithuania was founded, the country already had quite a number of educated people capable of engaging in philosophy, not only on a publicist but on a professional level. The best prepared in the field were graduates of philosophical studies in West European universities, who had obtained doctor’s degrees there. Most of them graduated, having prepared and defended their doctorate in two Catholic centers — The Higher Philosophy Institute at Leuven University and Freiburg University in Switzerland: Leonas Bistras — doctor of philosophy, thesis: "Justification of Goodness or the Moral Philosophy of V. Solovjov", Freiburg, 1921; Pranas Kuraitis — doctor of philosophy, thesis: "The Theory of Knowledge of W. Wundt", Leuven, 1911; Vincas Mykolaitis — doctor of philosophy, thesis "The Aesthetics of Vladimir Solovjov", Freiburg, 1922; Antanas Maliauskis — studied philosophy and social sciences in Leuven and obtained the doctor’s degree, thesis: "Cooperation in the Agriculture of France". He also obtained the doctor’s degree of political sciences, thesis: "Agricultural Syndicate Union of Southeast", Freiburg, 1912; Mecislovas Reinys — doctor of philosophy, thesis: "V. Solovjov’s Theory of Moral Principles", Leuven, 1912; Stasys Salkauskis — doctor of philosophy, thesis: "The Universal Soul in V. Solovjov’s Philosophy", Freburg, 1920; Izidorius Tamosaitis — doctor of philosophy, thesis: "V. Solovjov’s Criteriology", Freiburg, 1920.

They were the main persons able to work professionally in philosophy and parallel sciences in the new University of Lithuania. In preparing their theses for doctor’s degrees at Freiburg and Leuven they were orientated toward the study of the heritage of Solovjov. Their good knowledge of Russian enabled them to acquaint the scientists of Western universities with the heritage of this prominent Slavic philosopher, whose ideas held public attention at the time.

Salkauskis read the lectures of logic and introduction to philosophy in the Humanities section of Kaunas High Courses. P. Dovydaitis read lectures of philosophy too, and had begun the philosophy course with the lecture "Lithuanian Philosophy among the Philosophies of Other Nations: Goals and Methods."

These studies were concentrated in two faculties of the University: theological-philosophical and the humanities. Despite the twin nature of philosophy studies, the existence of parallel departments was constantly questioned. Nevertheless, the situation remained unchanged and was evaluated positively as the expression of theoretical variety in Lithuanian philosophy.

The theological-philosophical faculty became the main center of philosophy studies within the Philosophy section of the Humanities faculty. In order to qualify in philosophy the student had to choose a main discipline or specialty and two complementary disciplines. In the philosophy section one could choose from: philosophy, philology/classical languages, Lithuanian, German, French language and literature, world history, the history of Lithuania, psychology and pedagogics, sociology and geography. Four subjects were obligatory for students of the philosophy section: introduction to philosophy, logic, psychology, methods of the scientific work.

There were three branches of philosophy: 1. Philosophic system: the introduction to philosophy, logic and methodology of science, epistemology, ontology, philosophy of nature, theodicy, ethics with philosophy of jurisprudence, aesthetics, philosophy of culture and psychology; 2. History of philosophy: ancient philosophy, philosophy of the Middle Ages, philosophy of the modern age and epistemology; 3. philosophy of nature: introduction to the natural sciences, philosophy of nature, psychology and ontology. In addition there was the branch of sociology: sociology, ethics, philosophy of law.

The wide spectrum of specialities and specialization was understandable, since most graduates of the philosophy section became teachers in the gymnasium, and thus they were able to teach several subjects. As pedagogy and psychology were obligatory for the licenses of gymnasium teachers, there was a Department of Pedagogy and Its History, and a Department of Theoretical and Experimental Psychology.

There were two Departments of Philosophy. P. Kuraitis headed the Department of Introduction to Philosophy and History of Philosophy for years. He lectured in epistemology, ontology, history of philosophy: modern and world thought; and sometimes in theodicy and the philosophy of the Middle Ages. In the theological faculty he sometimes gave courses in Catholic social doctrine and special theology: in 1929-1937 he served as the dean of theological-philosophical faculty. He published and edited the Catholic magazine Tiesos kelias (The Path of Truth) cooperated in Logos, Zidinys (Hearth), Lietuvos mokykla (The School of Lithuania), XX amzius (20th Century) and other publications. He took part in the activities of the Lithuanian Catholic Academy of Sciences and was the spiritual leader of the religious organization "Ateitininkai". He began his work as a docent in the University with the traditional inaugural lecture "The Position of Epistemology Today and the Main Principles of Its Orientation" on April 8, 1922 (Logos, 1921-1922, N. 3-4). In the autumn of the same year he was promoted extraordinary professor, and in 1935 full professor.

L. Bistras headed the Department of Systematic Philosophy. He studied medicine at the universities of Geneve and Tartu, but he had turned to philosophy. He lectured on the philosophy of nature, philosophy of law, political economy, theory of the state, theodicy. He took an active part in the Christian Democratic party and was a member of the Lithuanian Parliament in 1926. Bistras published his thesis for a doctor’s degree (in German) and several articles.

Dovydaitis, the head of the Department of the History of Religions in Theological section, lectured on ancient philosophy and the philosophy of the Middle Ages. He was signatory of the Independence Act of February 16th. Dovydaitis had studied law and graduated from Moscow University as a jurist, but he did not like jurisprudence and began working in philosophy, when he was still a student. Dovydaitis read the history of religions to the students of the theological seminary, and the ancient history and philosophy of history to the students of history, but most listeners were attracted to his course on the history of education. He was invited as a docent to the University of Lithuania, was promoted extraordinary professor in June 1922 and full professor in 1928. Evaluating his overall work, the faculty conferred a degree of doctor of philosophy on Dovydaitis in 1935.

He lectured in his own specific style: no written notes for his lectures, a broad array of books (mostly in German), magazines, articles, extracts around himself from which he translated on the spot into fluent and rich Lithuanian, adding his own commentaries and evaluations. Dovydaitis knew his subject well; the lectures were weighty. He usually lacked time to prepare lectures, because he was involved heavily in huge publishing and editorial work, a huge of one person.

Salkauskis had turned from jurisprudence to philosophy, too. He did not go to Freiburg to study philosophy empty-handed, but had published the study "Church and Culture" in Draugija (Society). Salkauskis was invited as a docent to the University of Lithuania in 1922, was promoted to extraordinary professor several months later and to full professor in 1928. He headed the Department of Pedagogy and Its History in the theological-philosophical faculty. He lectured in pedagogics and its history, and also read the introduction to philosophy, logic, philosophy of culture, aesthetics, methods of general scientific work and other special courses: the science of morality, the principles of social education, special problems of culture, theory of terminology, etc. Salkauskis gradually reduced the number of his courses and passed them to other lecturers. Even the course of philosophy of culture in which his contribution was considerable was given over to A. Maceina. Salkauskis was particularly fond of pedagogy and its history and methods of scientific work. He prepared the lectures carefully, with full texts.

Salkauskis also was active in social work. He was the ideologist of the "Ateitininkai" and their chief leader. He collected the articles devoted to this organization into the book Ateitininku ideologija paskutiniu laiku formavimosi vyksme (The Ideology of "Ateitininkai" in Shaping Recent Times, K., 1933). He was one of the founders of the Lithuanian Catholic Academy of Sciences and for some time edited the periodicals Romuva (Haven) and Zidinys (Hearth). Salkauskis did not engage in politics, but in 1935 he wrote a letter to President A. Smetona urging him to change the authoritarian party regime into a democracy. Salkauskis was very productive and in his works created concepts important for Lithuanian philosophy.

Maceina began to work in the section of philosophy in this faculty in 1935. He graduated from the University (studies in philosophy and pedagogics), and took advanced courses in the universities of Leuven, Freiburg, Strasbourg and Brussels. He received the doctor’s degree with the thesis "National Education" in 1934 and his habilitation with the thesis "The Process of Education" in 1936. In the philosophy section he lectured on the methods of general scientific work, philosophy of culture and history of pedagogy. Maceina was a productive author. Over the years he spent in the university he published five books, many articles in Naujoji Romuva (The New Haven), Logos, Tiesos kelias (The Path of Truth), Naujoji vaidilute (The New Priestess) and others and took part in the activities of the "Ateitininkai" and Christian Democrats.

The seminar of philosophy in the section of philosophy was led by Kuraitis, who was in charge of the library of the seminar and subscribed to five or six philosophical journals in German and French in order to expand the range of information channels.

The largest number (31) of graduates from the section of philosophy of theological-philosophical faculty was in 1929. In other years the number of graduates varied from over a dozen to nine, eight, seven, five and only two in 1938. Very few (16) people completed studies in the section of philosophy in the faculty of Humanities — only four, three, two, one and in some years none. But many students from other faculties, for whom the subject of philosophy was obligatory or optional, attended lectures read by the professors of this faculty.

In the beginning there was only one Department of Philosophy in the faculty. Vosylius Sezemanas was invited to be the head of Department in 1923. He was born in Vyborg of a Swedish father from Finland, and a German mother from St. Petersburg and received his education in philosophy and the classical languages at the University of St. Petersburg. As a promising scholar Sezemanas was sent for advanced studies to the universities of Marburg and Berlin. On returning, he became a private docent at the University of St. Petersburg, but during the Bolshevik period was not in St. Petersburg. He received an invitation from the University of Lithuania with joy and began learning Lithuanian which he mastered so well that he spoke it without any accent and wrote without any mistakes. He even assisted Salkauskis with the preparation of the Lithuanian philosophic terms. For some years he read lectures in German, but later in Lithuanian. Sezemanas published his lectures on logic read in the University of Lithuania under the title Logika (Logic) in 1929. He lectured in the main courses of philosophy: logic, introduction to philosophy, epistemology, cosmology, aesthetics, ancient philosophy, philosophy of the Middle Ages, modern philosophy, and held seminars and proseminars in these subjects. Sezemanas gave special courses: Russian philosophy, Hegelian philosophy, English aesthetics, philosophy of organic nature, the problem of freedom, the problem of suffering, etc. For Sezemanas’s election to full professor of the University of Lithuania in 1928, the prominent European philosophers, N. Lossky, S. Frank and N. Hartman (Sezemanas’s friend from St. Catherine German Gymnasium in St. Petersburg) sent recommendations. Sezemanas published major works on the problems of cognitive theory in Eranus published by the section of philosophy of the faculty, and in German philosophical journals.

When two departments of philosophy were established in the section of philosophy, Sezemanas headed the Department of the History of Philosophy, and Iz. Tamosaitis, former head of the Department of general and experimental philosophy, became chief of the Department of Systematic Philosophy. From 1923 Tamosaitis, professor since 1924, lectured on the introduction to philosophy, logic, ontology, ethics, philosophy of religion, general psychology and read special courses on social philosophy, the ethics of M. Scheler, and the social philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. He edited the Eranus, Vairas (The Helm), the theoretical magazine tautininkai, and published studies in Logos, Zidinys (Hearth) and other periodicals.

Johanas Strauchas (born in Trakai and graduated from the University of St. Petersburg, where he studied philosophy, history and the natural sciences) worked as a docent in the section of philosophy. At the same time he acted as principal of Kaunas German Gymnasium. Strauchas lectured in logic, psychology and the history of philosophy. He translated works by Laski, Solovjov and Petra ycki into German. He prepared a textbook of philosophy, but the war prevented its publication in Kaunas; after the war he did a German edition for publication there.

In 1923-1926 Smetona lectured in philosophy: ethics, courses on Plato’s poetics and the stylistics of the Lithuanian language in the Humanities Faculty. He translated the dialogues of Plato, and published articles in ethics and history.

Maliauskis, head of the Department of Sociology for many years, lectured in sociology, ethics, theodicy and other subjects. He wrote articles on politics and the issues of social life, and studied the problems of ethics. He published the following works in this field: Demokratija (Democracy, K., 1924), Etika (Ethics, K., 1935) and Teodiceja (Theodicy, K., 1931).

Conferences and symposia were not in fashion at the time, but philosophical life was intensive in Kaunas, as is seen from the publications, through more narrow.

Professors of philosophy went abroad to take part in the philosophical congresses and anniversary celebrations of eminent philosophers, where they made reports. Kuraitis took part in the celebration of the 200th anniversary of Kant’s birth in Konigsberg in 1924 and delivered a speech in the name of the University of Lithuania. He took part in the international congresses on Thomistic philosophy in Rome in 1925 and 1936, and the social week of Catholics in France, 1937. V. Sezemanas together with Kuraitis took part in the second international Hegel congress in Berlin. But the philosophers of the University of Lithuania did not arrange conferences on problematic themes and there were no philosophical symposia attended by foreign scientists in Kaunas.

Catholic philosophy in the theological-philosophical faculty reflected the horizons of Western scientific centers. Neo-Thomism dominated in Catholic philosophy. Some of its representatives, considered conservative, declared Thomism to be open to needed expansion and improvement, but that in principle Thomas Aquinas had expressed everything required for Catholic philosophy. Such conservatives were in the minority in neo-scholasticism: Kuraitis was their most prominent representative in the University of Lithuania. A second group in Catholic philosophy did not consider the revival of the thought of Thomas Aquinas to be the ultimate goal. It regarded Catholic philosophy as open to progress, development, and Thomism to be subject to enrichment through the adoption of ideas from modern trends of philosophy; all philosophical conceptions, suitable for Catholic philosophy, were to be used and adopted. This orientation dominated in the theological-philosophical faculty of the University of Lithuania.

During their studies abroad the future professors of the philosophical faculty attended by lectures of the most eminent representatives of neo-Thomist philosophy or familiarized themselves with their work: Cardinal D.J. Mercier, founder of the Leuven Higher Institute of Philosophy, and other eminent neo-Thomists who worked in Leuven: sociologist S. Deploige, epistemologist L. Noel, in the philosophy of natural science, D. Nys, and historian of philosophy M. de Wulf, and others.

Salkauskis drew from M. de Munnyck, a Belgian Dominican, professor of the Freiburg University as well as Maritain known for his works Three Reformers, The Dream of Descartes, and especially his work: Integral Humanism. Kuraitis translated into Lithuanian in 1926 the work of the famous historian of philosophy, A. Stockly, Features of the History of Philosophy. Even today this work serves as a comprehensive and thorough teaching aid for students.

The program of the Leuven Higher Institute of Philosophy made the following assertion:

Salkauskis defines the relationship between philosophy and the special sciences in this way:

Here Salkauskis was concerned with the immanence in the development of philosophy: philosophy has its principles and concepts and is advanced on their basis. Therefore, in agreeing with b) and c), one still has to tackle a). The special sciences are able to reveal that a recent conception in philosophy is outdated in that it does not reflect the latest achievements of the special sciences: for example, quantum physics and the theory of relativity have added new content to the philosophical conceptions of space, time and movement; genetics has done the same with the conception of expediency and inherence. Modern logic has extended the conception of the process of knowledge, the creation of multi-valent logic has revealed that the laws of logic are not apriori but plastic and subject to changes, and that some laws of logic may be rejected.

Point d) is also formulated in a different way today after bitter experience with the warning role of philosophy (when philosophy turned into a kind of censor) starting with the Middle Ages through the Soviet period when a Marxist scholasticism persecuted progressive scientific ideas and their spokesmen. Today point d) is formulated in this way: philosophical problems arise in the special sciences, especially in research on the foundations of sciences; the special sciences have no means to solve these and therefore borrow from philosophy.

Although there were numerous dissertations on Solovjov, there were no followers of Solovjov in the University of Lithuania. For example, Salkauskis, as a student in Moscow University, took part in the activity of the Solovjov society, and prepared his first published work "Church and Culture" under the influence of this Slavic philosopher, though with some reservations. However, even before his Freiburg studies Salkauskis had become critical of his former idol, passing from Solovjov’s philosophical prophetism to Thomistic intellectualism. Dambrauskas-Jakstas was the only one who remained loyal to Solovjov in Lithuania. Dambrauskas-Jakstas valued this Slavic philosopher above Thomas Aquinas, as can be seen in his spiritual independence.

Sezemanas, a man of broad philosophical culture, was influenced by several philosophical trends of that time — the neo-Kantian school of Marburg, phenomenology, realism — without becoming an advocate of any of these. Although he made use of the phenomenological method, he showed its weak side and thought; he considered the phenomenological method not to be universal but in need of being complemented by other trends.

At the beginning of the 20th century logic was being transformed in Europe and America, changing from the traditional Aristotelian logic. The value of the new symbolic or mathematical logic was discussed in Catholic philosophy. Under the influence of the achievements of the Lvov-Warsaw school, the Polish neo-Thomists became the avant-gardists in the rejection of traditional logic. This they epistemologized and supplemented with psychology, which began to lose the actual problems of logic.

Their neighbors in Kaunas, however, pursued another way. They had heard about modern logic and referred to it, but nobody proposed, as did the Polish neo-Thomists, that the old Aristotelian logic should be replaced with modern logic. Further the philosophers of Kaunas considered the new logic not to be promising as it turned from the theory of reasoning into a technique of reasoning. The negative assessment of modern logic arose from poor acquaintance with its theories. The theorists in Kaunas lecturing in logic and writing about logic — Dambrauskas-Jakstas, Dovydaitis, Salkauskis, Iz. Tamosaitis, L. Bistras and J. Strauchas — had followed the conservative view of Western neo-Thomists, represented by the Leuven school of D.J. Mercier and his followers, regarding the value of the new logic.

The mathematicians of the University discussed the problems of modern logic. The new logic was a method for researching the problems of the foundations of mathematics foundations and eliminating the paradoxes of set theory. The mathematicians of the University discussed three trends of mathematical substantiation — logism, formalism, intuitionism and their logical method.

There were hardly any philosophers who did not apply epistemological approaches to the problems under investigation. Articles on problems of epistemology were published by Dovydaitis, Iz. Tamosaitis, M. Reinys, Sezemanas, and the status of epistemology in the structure of neo-Thomistic philosophy was discussed by Salkauskis. But only one work in epistemology was published: Pagrindiniai gnoseologijos klausimai (The Main Problems of Epistemology, K., 1930) by Kuraitis.

Epistemology did not have a strictly determined formal place in neo-Thomistic philosophy. Neither Aristotle nor Thomas Aquinas had left any work dealing specifically with epistemology. As a subject it was formed in modern times when Locke, Kant and others came to consider the investigation of cognition and not of being to be the main problem of philosophy. The contribution of modern authors to epistemology was so substantial that the old position of Thomas Aquinas on the problems of cognition was no longer satisfying. As an essentially new science epistemology integrated many actual, living problems ignored by St. Thomas, but dealt with by Kant, the outstanding philosophers of the 19th and 20th centuries. Epistemology treated the following problems: the character of epistemology as a science, its historical development, its main trends and directions, the problem of truth, the problem of the limits of cognition.

This is the key subject of the whole system of neo-Thomism. The only author who dealt with the problem on the theoretical level was Kuraitis, who published a large work Ontologija (Ontology), t.I, K., 1931, t.II, K., 1933. This work was not finished. Other authors made only a passing reference to the problems of ontology.

The old ontology (metaphysics) as a science about being was questioned by the French Enlightenment, Kant and positivism. Kant called his pre-critical period, when he worked under the influence of Wolff’s metaphysics, a dogmatic somnolence. Catholic philosophy revived the old tradition of ontology as a discipline of general metaphysics which also comprises cosmology, psychology and theodicy. Though psychology had divorced philosophy at the time of W. Wundt and had become an independent science, some philosophers regretted this separation and remained loyal to the so-called philosophical psychology, which was trying to retain psychology in the orbit of philosophy.

Reinys presented philosophical psychology in the theological-philosophical faculty. In 1922-1931 he was the head of the department of theoretical and experimental psychology in the faculty, and after 1932 moved to the Department of Systematic Philosophy. Reinys read the introduction of psychology; general, comparative and pedagogical psychology; and psychology of religion. He published articles in psychology and philosophy.

Kuraitis defined ontology as the science of the first elements of being. Owing to the negative attitude of many philosophic trends of the time to traditional ontology, substantiation of ontology became a pressing issue. How is such ontology possible if it draws its materials from all of experience, scientific and non-scientific, and is an essential part of the philosophic methodology of the other sciences, while being independent of them? If only the world of physical nature be recognized, it is a puzzle how ontology, theorizing by its method of philosophical abstraction the material of ordinary non-scientific experience and being independent of scientific progress, is able to provide foundations for the special sciences, or how its fundamental conceptions and laws could have objective meaning. Scientists found such ontology suspicious and began at once to question what is the value of the conceptions and principles of ontology created without taking into account the latest achievements in the sciences and offered for the use of the sciences. Following Aristotle, the old ontology looked at reality through the glasses of a teleology: every object seeks the end which corresponds to its nature. Science in modern times looks at reality through the glasses of determinism instead of teleology. It was anachronistic to declare in the 20th century that matter was passive and only form gave it activity. Modern representatives of Catholic philosophy liberated themselves from form, perfection and other old meanings.

Kuraitis extended the competence of philosophy to the investigation of specific philosophical problems: the methodological and social function of philosophy, the relation between professional philosophy and common sense, nationality and philosophy, etc.

Discussions have never ceased over whether considering the general conceptions and principles of the natural sciences, nature philosophy can explain nature as a whole by the principles of ontology. Naturalists by definition denied the possibility of such a philosophy of nature and the philosophy of nature was not included as a component of the many trends in modern philosophy; the development of a philosophy of nature was considered a rather wasteful, non-progressive, anachronistic undertaking. A philosophy of nature as a whole was regarded as impossible. Only philosophy of its integral parts — philosophy of physics, philosophy of biology, etc., are seen nowadays.

There were two reasons for the weaker development of the philosophy of nature in Lithuania. First of all, philosophers lacked a profound education in natural sciences. L. Bistras, who lectured in the philosophy of nature had some education in natural sciences, but had not published anything in this field. Sezemanas, who lectured in a special course on philosophy of nature had studied medicine for one year but inclined to philosophical problems in biology that appealed more to him. Dovydaitis had educated himself in natural sciences independently. Another reason was that studies in the natural sciences had just begun in the University.

Theories of the Western cultural crisis were discussed in Europe at that time e.g. by Spengler that culture blossoms, lives and dies; that civilization is the last period of cultural development; and that the West is heading to its downfall in an exhaustion of human creative strength; and by Berdiaiev that culture is a failure in the cognition of truth, the creation of beauty, and the formation of moral and legal relations in the creative conquest of nature; that in his creative activity man hoped to win reality by his works but won only symbols; and that "religious transfiguration", i.e. turning to God, is the only way out of the tragic human situation.

Salkauskis made a precise evaluation of the relationship between culture and civilisation, pointing to their interdependence. A civilization collapses not because of its senility and the end of culture, but because the foundations of the civilization — its cultural approaches, attitudes and motives — are destroyed. The failure of a civilization still does not indicate the collapse of a culture: if cultural attitudes survive, society retains the possibility of re-creating civilization. Salkauskis’s evaluation of this problem is precise. A similar assessment is made by K. Popper, one of the great methodologists of modern science: let us imagine that a global catastrophe occurs and that the economic system, the industrial and social organization are destroyed; but if technical and scientific knowledge has survived, the recreation of material culture and social organization is possible.

Salkauskis pointed out that civilization has recurrent effect upon culture and is capable of inspiring both positive and negative phenomena in the society — weakness, consumerism and perversion. A dangerous situation arises where those who have created the riches are not permitted to use them because others have usurped them. This process is known as social alienation, but the methodological views of Salkauskis did not yet allow him to label it this way.

He analyzed this process as a problem of moral and cultural degradation, and he proposed overcoming it by educative means: to rear a society, bent not on consumerism, but on active, creative cultural production. In this connection Salkauskis and Maceina studied Prometheism, pointing out that the way out of the Promethean tragedy, brought about by excessive confidence in the power of culture, was to move from the cultural field into that of religion. Religion encourages culture to follow the path of required progress; culture finds completeness in religion. Both our eminent theorists of culture maintain and that religion does not absorb culture, but only indicates its direction.

In ascribing a decisive role in the cultural process to creation and considering creativity the essential sign of the human, Maceina strove to present the humanization of nature as the meaning of creation. But he wrote that at the time the Western world had just encountered ecological problems, which were still non-existent in Lithuania. Maceina’s argument to the effect that creation implies over-powering nature and subduing it to one’s spirit, that the appearance of the human spirit in the world means the arrival of God for man — such arguments are no longer valid in this time of ecological crisis. Today we must support the outlook of ancient Stoics: to adapt ourselves to nature, not to subdue it to our spirit.

The theorizations of Salkauskis and Maceina in the philosophy of culture are of high international level. Maceina called them a cultural theism: divine creation is not complete, but is completed by man.

Sezemanas was a professional lecturer in the course of aesthetics and an expert student of its problems in the humanities faculty. He had good knowledge of the historical development of aesthetics and of most modern trends, and was able to make a critical assessment and qualified theoretical reflection. The work Estetika (Aesthetics, V., 1970), published after Sezemanas’s death, is an original expression of long years of studies. It is the weightiest work on aesthetics ever published in Lithuania, resulting from the courses of aesthetics he read in the universities of Vilnius and Vytautas Magnus.

A specific research center or social problems, "Lietuviski socialiniai kursai" (Lithuanian Social Courses) was opened in Kaunas as early as 1909. It was organized on the initiative of professors from St. Petersburg Ecclesiastical Academy, especially, J. Matulaitis, who had started to lecture in sociology in the Academy. Dambrauskas-Jakstas, P. Bucys, J. Staugaitis, and J. Maciulis-Maironis had lectured at this centre too. Social problems were most topical for the country, which had won independence and begun developing new social relations.

Although similar conceptions of the corporate society and state are critically evaluated by modern democratic theory as insufficiently expressing the political organization of society, the Declaration of the Romuvieciai was a significant document for political life in Lithuania, since it expressed sincere concern over the authoritarian regime which had formed in the young state of Lithuania, and proposed an alternate. Young Maceina, researching the social problem, formulated it as a problem of social justice and expressed it in the work of the same title Socialinis teisingumas (Social Justice, K., 1938). For him social justice was both economic inequality and a moral problem; the social issue included not only the struggle for improvement of economic conditions of life, but the struggle for the recognition of human value. Noting that social justice could only be accomplished by evolution and reform, Maceina proposed, first of all, to reform the human spirit by changing the attitude to wealth and property through grounding this attitude on the principles of Christian social life. The project of Maceina shows a deep concern for the condition of the poor. On the other hand, the orientation towards the ancient ideal, propagated by the Fathers of Church, indicates, that young Maceina trusted too much in philosophical models, and was insufficiently familiar with the trends of real social development.

The result of Girnius’s contemplation of many years is Zmogus be Dievo (A Man without God, Chicago, 1964). It is a psychological and philosophical analysis of a non-believer. The work possesses features characteristic of Girnius — thoroughness, frankness, sincerity and purity of mind. The sense of human existence — the fundamental question of the work — is revealed through individual faith in divine values. Thus, objective values are discovered in looking at the world with a theistic outlook, with which a man participates in the meaningful entirety of existence and its greatness is hidden in the call for eternal life. In this way existential theism affirms and transcend moral ideals as objective values.

Juozas Girnius is a classic of Lithuanian philosophy. Having started his studies of existential philosophy on Lithuanian soil, he proceeded to the European. His works on nation and national faithfulness give meaning to the existence and fate of our migration.

Equally important in this field are the works of Maceina, another classic in philosophy. His existential thinking began during his work at Vytautas Magnus University, but it was not so conspicuous. His existential thinking was elaborated in exile in Jobo drama (The Drama of Job) and in one of the most significant works of Lithuanian philosophy, Filosofijos kilme ir prasme (The Origin and the Sense of Philosophy, Rome, 1978). Maceina created the works of Lithuanian Catholic existentialism, influenced by those Catholic modernists of the Western world who strove not only to enrich Catholicism with the ideas of existential philosophy, but to interpret Christianity as an essentially existential world outlook. These theorists asserted that the truths of Christianity are more like an invitation for believers to perceive their tragic situation in the world and to live authentically — not in a stable calm condition, but in anxiety, concern and self-projection. The value of existential thinking for Maceina is not so much in the accuracy of its conclusions, as rather in the search or discovery of problems and in their presentation in a way that stimulates further thinking. His works, expressed in clear language, serve as a standard for expressing the complex constructions of existential philosophy in Lithuanian terms.

Pranas Skardzius accented the terms, and Sezemanas checked the equivalents in German and Russian, and Schmittlein, who was lecturer of French in the University, checked the equivalents in French. In the notes on the use of the dictionary the specifics of the use of terms was indicated: synonymy in the philosophical terminology, the usage of international terms, the functioning of terms in context. It is the only Lithuanian dictionary of philosophical terms to date. It is featured in the article "Philosophical Dictionaries and Encyclopedias" of The Encyclopedia of Philosophy in the following way:

The first Lithuanian dictionary of terms in philosophy was not a defining dictionary — it did not contain the concepts defined by the terms. Our young philosophy did not feel strong enough to compile such a dictionary. But the explanations of terms and examples (total 300), attached to the dictionary, offered a plausible compensation for the absence of definitions. In these the semantic family, the main term and its possible derivatives are indicated, and their meaning, followed by examples, is explained.

The initiative of Salkauskis in terminology was presented professionally, and the dictionary of philosophical terms compiled by him survived the test of time. The standardization of terms, given in the dictionary, has been accepted and recognized today; only a small part of proposed terms have not taken root and are not used. The author of the dictionary remained true to the principle that the international terms could not always be replaced by Lithuanian terms where they did not express the semantic meaning conveyed by the international terms. The study of Salkauskis benefited much from the author’s sober attitude to terminological work. No language can be absolutely logical or absolutely pure. There are always illogicality and barbarisms in a language. If they are firmly set and may not be removed without breaking the established rules of language, they must be tolerated, consenting to the status quo for the sake of the stability of the language. The studies of Salkauskis on the Lithuanian terminology of philosophy are unique, the only ones of its kind thusfar.

In what sense are we the heirs of the philosophical legacy created in Vytautas Magnus University? The famous scholars engrossed in philosophy produced what had not, until then, existed in the sphere of Lithuanian thought. They enriched the Lithuanian world with their originality and stretched its boundaries.

The situation in philosophy has essentially changed over the time since the loss of Vytautas Magnus University half a century ago. New trends have formed, new problems have emerged. But time has not destroyed most of the ideas, propagated in the departments of the University. These ideas have enriched our philosophical life. They have also enriched those who support interpretations different from the trends of that time and recognize that the identification of problems is essential in science. The philosophers of the University of that time are now equally close to everyone as the discoverers of problems of real significance, as the scientists who introduced existing problems into Lithuanian life.

1. Logika (Kaunas, 1919).

2. J. Girnius, "Pranas Kuraitis," Pranas Kuraitis, Filosofijos rastu rinktine (Chicago, 1990), p. 319.

3. J. Girnius, Pranas Dovydaitis (Chicago, 1975), p. 646.

4. K. Ambrozaitis, Sub specie aeternitatis aut durationis? Logos, 1930, N. 1.

5. Lietuvos Centrinis valstybes archyvas, F 631, ap. 18, b.13 (The Central State Archives of Lithuania, Fond 631, file 18, dossier 13).

6. Ebenda, F, 631, 18, d. 12.

7. S. Salkauskis, Propedeutiniai filosofijos mokslo klausimai. Rastai, t. 1. V., 1990, p. 107.

8. Ebenda, p. 90.

9. Ebenda, p. 101-104.

10. Iz. Tamosaitis, "Vertybiu filosofija" Vairas, 1933, N. 5; "Zmogus - asmuo," Vairas, 1938, N. 15-16; Makso "Schelerio etika", Eranus, 1938, t.IV.

11. Eranus, 1935, t. III, p. 87-143.

12. "Zum Problem der logischen Paradoxen", Eranus, 1935, t. III, p. 5-85.

13. "Philosophical works and their authors from the University of Lithuania," Lietuvos filosofines minties istorijos saltiniai (History Sources of the Lithuanian Philosophic Thought), T. II, V., 1991.

14. The Library of the University of Vilnius, F. I - D. 1139.

15. S. Salkauskis, Propedeutiniai filosofijos mokslo kalusimai, p. 116-120.

16. V. Sezemanas and P. Kuraitis, "Pagrindiniai gnoseologijos klausimai", Naujoji Romuva, 1931, N. 22, p. 532.

17. V. Sezemanas, "Musu laiku gnoseologijai naujai besiformuojant," Eranus, 1935, t. III. Also V. Sezemanas, Rastai. Gnoseologija (Vilnuis, 1987).

18. P. Dovydaitis, "Siu dienu gamtos mokslu problemos katalikiskos programos sviesoje," Zidinys, 1925, N. 2; "Siu laiku biologu paziuros i gyvybes reiskinius/Bibliografines apzvalgos bruozai", Logos, 1933; 1934, N. 2; 1935, N. 1-2; 1937, N. 1; "Mendelio uzmirsimas, prisikelimas ir triumfas", Kosmos, 1935, N. 4-6.

19. V. Sezemanas, "Organiskos gamtos filosofija. - Speckursas, skaitytas humanitariniu mokslu fakulteto filosofijos skyriuje" (masinrastis) (Philosophy of Animate Nature. - Special Course, Lectured in the Section of Philosophy of the Humanities Faculty) (typewritten, the Library of the University of Vilnius), F. 122-74.

20. K. Masiulis, Moderniojo mokslinio pasaulevaizdzio formavimasis Lietuvoje (Vilnius, 1992), p. 68.

21. On the basis of his lectures S. Salkauskis published the work: Kulturos filosofijos metmenys (The Sketch of Philosophy of Culture) in 1926. He improved his lectures and left the manuscript "Specialiosios kulturos filosofijos problemos" (Special Problems of Philosophy of Culture). On the basis of his lectures Maceina published the work "Kulturos filosofijos ivadas" (The Introduction to Philosophy of Culture" in 1936; issued the study "Pirmines kulturos pagrindai" (The Principles of Primary Culture) Logos, 1933; 1934, N. 2; 1935 N.1,2; 1937, N. 1, the other study "Kulturos sinteze ir lietuviskoji kultura" (The Synthesis of Culture and Lithuanian Culture", Zidinys, 1939, N. 4-7, 10-12. They both published large articles on the philosophy of culture.

22. K. Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, vol. II, 15 (London, 1986).

23. A. Maceina, "Kulturos filosofijos avadas", Rastai, T. I, V., 1991, p. 184.

24. A. Maceina, Burzuazijos zlugimas (K., 1940).

25. J. Aleksa, Lietuvisku gyvenimo keliu beieskant (K., 1933).

26. A. Maceina, "Kulturos sinteze ie lietuviskoji kultura", Zidinys, 1939, N. 4-7, 10-12.

27. L. Bistras, Die Rechtfertigung des Guten oder die Moralphilosophie W. Solowjofs (K., 1922).

28. A. Maliauskis, Etika. Pirmoji knyga. Bendroji dalis (K., 1935).

29. K. Girnius, "`Veritatis splendor’ ir doroves teorijos" Naujasis Zidinys, 1955, N. 6.

30. J. Blazys, Tolerancija kaip kulturos principas (K., 1936).

31. S. Salkauskis, "Grozis filosofijos sviesoje", Rastai, t.I, V., 1990, p. 450.

32. P. Dielininkaitis, Korporacine santvarka. - Lietuvu Kataliku mokslo akademijos suvaziavimo darbai. T. II (K., 1937); "Pastaruju laiku bandymai socialini klausimi susvelninti," Zidinys, 1938, N. 2.

33. "J organiskosios valstybes kurybi", Naujoji Romuva, 1936, N. 8. "Del organiskosios valstybes kurybos", Naujoji Romuva, 1936, N. 9. Signators of the Declaration: J. Ambrazevicius, P. Dielininkaitis, J. Grinius, J. Grusas, Z. Ivinskis, J. Keliuotis, A. Maceina, I. Malinauskas, P. Mantvydas, K. Pakstas, E. Pakuckas, J. Pankauskas, A. Salys, I. Skrupskelis, A. Vaiciulaitis, B. Vitkus - were connected with Vytautas Magnus University as its students, and the majority of them later became professors and docents of the University. S. Salkauskis who had not participated in the creation of the Declaration, later published an approval of the Declaration.

34. J. Girnius, Pastaba apie egzistencializma. - Lietuviu Kataliku mokslo akademijos suvaziavimo darbai, t. II (K., 1937); "Jvadas i Heideggerio egzistencialistines filosofijos pagrindu svarstyma", Logos, 1936, N. 1; "Heideggerio egzistencialistines filosofijos pagrindu kritiskasis svarstymas", Logos, 1936, N. 2; "Egzistencialistine filosofija ir ateities filosofavimo rupesciai", Zidinys, 1939, N. 5-6.

35. J. Girnius, "Laisve ir butis. Karl Jasperso egzistencine metafizika", Aidu leidinys, 1953.

36. S. Salkauskis, "Terminologijos teorija ir lietuviskoji filosofijos terminija" Logos, 1925, N. 1.

37. "Bendroji filosofijos terminija", Logos, 1937, N. 2. Offprint: Bendroji filosofijos terminija, LKD Terminologijos sekcijos apsvarstyta, papildyta ir priimta (K., 1938).

38. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 6 (New York, London: 1967), p. 188.