prof. dr hab. Tadeusz BORYS – Uniwersytet Zielonogórski, Instytut Nauk o Zarządzaniu i Jakości, ul. Podgórna 50, 65-246 Zielona Góra, Polska, e-mail: t.borys@wez.uz.zgora.pl
Received 5.02.2026. Accepted 16.02.2026
Abstract
Purpose: This article to some extent refers to a series of qualitative essays that I published in „Problems of Quality” in 2021–2022. They were devoted to finding the feelings module in the quality of life and recognizing several of its representatives, such as hope, gratitude, patience, empathy, compassion or trust (cf. [11, 12]). The aim of this article – in my intention to initiate further images of the quality of life – is to analyze the cause-and-effect of a peculiar and constantly „spillover” pandemic of various forms of human destruction, increasingly threatening his subjectivity – degrading his HUMANITY, i.e. being simply human in everyday life. The common denominator for the growing “repertoire” of destructive actions is SELF DESTRUCTION overt or camouflaged self-destruction, which justifies the use of this term in the title of this article. The content of this article is subordinated to the answers to the following four important questions: (1) What are the relations between destruction, degradation, and devastation? – this is the etymological level of this diagnosis; (2) How to distinguish natural destruction from anthropogenic destruction? – it is the level of agency; (3) What are the „faces” of human destruction? – this is a typological level with a proposal of several criteria for recognizing destruction, and (4) Why does a person choose self-destruction? – after all, he has a more advantageous alternative.
Research methodology: The article uses methods of semantic and logical analysis in relation to the concept of destruction, as well as a literature review that highlights its interdisciplinary and multidimensional nature.
Conclusions: The main conclusions of the article are formulated in its final part in the form of six conclusions that bring us closer to answering the previously formulated question: why does a man choose destruction, and especially his self-destruction, i.e. the regression of his HUMANITY, instead of developmental change? – well, for every individual this choice should be obvious.
Cognitive value: The features of the cognitive novelty of this article should be seen primarily in the presented approach to destruction, and above all in the consideration of this category in the context of its two “sisters” – devastation and degradation – and in the analysis of destruction on three interrelated levels – etymological, causative, and typological. According to the literature review, such an approach is not only original, but also has a utilitarian value for further research on the phenomena of destruction.
Keywords
quality of life, destruction, degradation, classification