Instrumentalization as a Sin of Untruth




destitute time, instrumentalization, self-assertion, sin of untruth, strong form of instrumentalization, technology, truth of being, weak form of instrumentalization


The reconstructions, analyses and discussions concerning various broadly understood instrumentalized objects available in the subject literature allow one to distinguish and identify at least two interrelated forms of instrumentalization – a weak and a strong form. The former consists of using a particular object for fulfilling an aim in its unspecific functions. Thus, it can be treated as opposite to the phenomenon of functional fixation. The essence of the latter is a change in the position of the instrumentalized object, both in the ontological and axiological order – one which is a degrading change. It is this form of instrumentalization which allows the possibility of its reinterpretation in the categories of a sin of untruth. Such reinterpretation makes use of the multitude of forms of truth and their interrelationships, as well as of the distinction between a “great and small truth.” Thus, the heuristic value of the rhetoric of sin used here enables one to emphasise some important factual aspects. Firstly, referring to many possible dimensions in which instrumentalization can be subjected to evaluation, sin will be treated here metaphorically (due to taking into account all dimensions together) and literally (in order to highlight in consequence its moral, conscious and intended character). Secondly, this rhetoric can reflect the complex structure of instrumentalization, expressed in the categories of a sin committed “in thought, word, deed and omission,” of a light or heavy nature, with violation carried out on the nature of the instrumentalized object as its extreme form. Thirdly, rhetoric allows one to understand the perpetrator of instrumentalization’s activation of disguising, justifying or even absolving his activities. Fourthly, this results in seeking out the psychological mechanism of “being led into temptation.” Its complex character can be clearly seen in many cases, especially in the case of political instrumentalization of religion, where, on the one hand, the profanation of religion takes place, while on the other, the legitimisation, ennoblement or even sacralisation of politics occurs.


Bakhtin M. 2019. In: T. Snyder, Droga do niewolności. Rosja, Europa, Ameryka, Kraków: Znak Horyzont.

Borkowska-Nowak M. 2012. Racjonalność decyzji politycznych. Utarte ścieżki i nowe pomysły, Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.

Chyrowicz B. 2008. O sytuacjach bez wyjścia w etyce. Dylematy moralne: ich natura, rodzaje i sposoby rozstrzygania, Kraków: Społeczny Instytut Wydawniczy „Znak”.

Heidegger M. 1977. “The Question Concerning Technology”. In: Heidegger M. 1977. Basic Writings: From Being and Time (1927) to The Task of Thinking (1964) (Krell D.F., ed. with general introduction), London and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Heidegger M. 1971. “What Are Poets For?”. In: Heidegger M. 1971. Poetry, Language, Thought (trans. Hopstadter A.), New York: Harper and Row, San Francisco: Evanston.

Ingarden R. 1963. Z badań nad filozofią współczesną, Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Kempis à T. The Imitation of Christ, vol. 3. Retrieved from:




How to Cite

Krzyzewski, S. (2021). Instrumentalization as a Sin of Untruth. Intercultural Relations, 4(2(10), 94–110.