:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:審美態度理論之批判研究
作者:林致妘
作者(外文):LIN CHIN YUN
校院名稱:東海大學
系所名稱:哲學系
指導教授:史偉民
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2014
主題關鍵詞:美感經驗審美態度布洛斯托尼茨托瑪斯亞德里奇迪基Aesthetic ExperienceAesthetic AttitudeBulloughStolnitzTomasAldrichDickie
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:18
傳統美學研究對象向以「美的本質」為重心,但這樣的研究方向一直裹足不前,使致當代西方美學轉變以「人」(鑑賞者)的意識問題為出發,側重於「美感經驗」之命題的探討。甚於二十世紀初,更擴大了美感經驗的討論範圍,其中包括審美態度理論。回觀夏夫茨博里、艾迪生、哈奇森、休謨、艾莉森和康德等美學家從各種不同的意義下論述「無利害關係性」的概念,他們可謂審美態度理論之先軀。直至當代部分審美態度理論家主張,審美態度是使得美感經驗成為可能的條件,但他們對於審美態度理論的確實內涵,均有不同的說明。本論文將就以下五位態度理論家之審美態度理論進行探討:布洛的「心理距離說」(Psychical Distance)、斯托尼茨的「無利害關係說」(Disinterestedness)、維瓦斯的「非遞移說」(Intransitivity)、托瑪斯的「美感觀看說」(Aesthetic Vision)和亞德里奇的「印象式的觀看說」(Impressionistic Seeing)。然而,也有學者主張:根本不存在審美態度,其中以迪基最為強烈。縱然審美態度理論家主張的態度理論有過多的侷限,或因藝術型態的發展而不適用。總觀各家審美態度理論之探究,美感經驗有別於一般生活的經驗,自應透過判斷標準或觀看態度而完成。不同審美態度主張適用於不同的藝術類型,以證各種審美態度理論存在的必要性。
Traditional aesthetic study focuses on ”quality of beauty”. But due to its limited development in research, current western aesthetic switches to the issue of human awareness emphasizing the “aesthetic experience”. Even in the early twentieth century, the scope of aesthetic experience is further expanded, including aesthetic attitude theory. In retrospect, Lord Shaftesbury, Joseph Addison, Francis Hutcheson, David Hume, Archibald Alison and Immanuel Kant etc., have discussed the disinterested concept from a variety of different meanings, they can be considered as the pioneer of aesthetic attitude theory. Until recently some aesthetic attitude theorists claim that aesthetic experience is made possible by aesthetic attitude, but their contents of aesthetic attitude are different. There are five attitude theorists studied in this thesis: Ed. Bullough’s “Psychical Distance”, Jerome Stolnitz’s “Disinterestedness”, Eliseo Vivas’s “Intransitivity”, Vincent Tomas’s “Aesthetic Vision” and Virgil Aldrich’s “Impressionistic Seeing”. However, some scholars claim: aesthetic attitude does not exist. Among them, George Dickie strongly opposes. Theorists’ propositions clearly are more restricted, or developments of the arts types are not practical to use. Overall, through studying every aesthetic attitude theory, aesthetic experience is a special experience, it should be completed by judging from the criteria or viewing attitude. Different aesthetic attitude theories are applied to different arts types, to validate the necessity of the existence of a variety of aesthetic attitude theories.
參考文獻
1.Aldrich, Virgil C.. “Back to Aesthetic Experience.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 24
(1966), 365-371.
2.Aldrich, Virgil C.. Philosophy of Art. Englewood Cliffs, New York: Prentice Hall, 1963.
3.Beardsley, Monroe C.. “Aesthetic Experience Regained.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 28
(1969), 3-11.
4.Beardsley, Monroe C.. “The Aesthetic Point of View.” Metaphilosophy 1 (1970), 39-58.
5.Beardsley, Monroe C.. Aesthetics: Problems in The Philosophy of Criticism. New York: Swarthmore
College, 1958.
6.Bullough, Ed.. “’Psychical Distance’ as a Factor in Art and an Aesthetic Principle.” reprinted in M.
Levich, ed. Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Criticism 5:2 (1912), 233-254.
7.Bullough, Edward. The Modern Conception of Aesthetics, Edited with an introd. By Elizabeth M.
Wilkinson, ed., Aesthetics: Lectures and Essays by Edward Bullough Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press, 1957.
8.Carroll, Noël. Philosophy of Art, Canada: Routledge, 1999.
9.Dawson, Sheila. “’Distancing’ as an Aesthetic Principle.” Australasian Fournal of Philosophy, 39
(1961), 155-174.
10.Dewey, John. Art as Experience. New York, 1980.
11.Dickie, George. “Beardsley's Phantom Aesthetic Experience.” The Journal of Philosophy 62 (1965), 129-
136.
12.Dickie, George. “Bullough And The Concept of Psychical Distance.” Philosophy and Phenomenological
Research, (1961).
13.Dickie, George. Aesthetics, America: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1971.
14.Dickie, George. “Stolnitz's Attitude: Taste and Perception.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 43
(1984), 195-203.
15.Dickie, George. “The Myth of the Aesthetic Attitude.” American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (1964), 56-65.
16.Dickie, George. Aesthetic: An Introduction. Bobbs-Merrill Company, the United States of America, 1971.
17.Dickie, George. Art and the Aesthetic an Institutional Analysis. Cornell University Press, 1974.
18.Dziemidok, Bohdan. “Main Problems In The Theory of The Aesthetic Attitude.” Philosophical Inquiry:
International Quarterly, 70-77.
19.Feezell, Randolph M.. “Thinking About the Aesthetic Attitude.” Philosophical Topics XIII:3 (1985), 19-
32.
20.Fenner, David E. W.. The Aesthetic Attitude. Humanities Press International, 1996.
21.Hanfling, Oswald. “Five Kinds of Distance.” The British Journal of Aesthetics 40 (2000), 89-102.
22.Hume, David. “Of the Standard of Taste.” Edited by Robert Stecker and Ted Gracyk, Aesthetics Today,
Maryland: Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield Publisher, 2010.
23.Hutcheson, Francis. “An Inquiry into the Original of Our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue.” London, (1725).
24.Kant, Immanuel. The Critique Of Judgement. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952.
25.Kemp, Gary. “The Aesthetic Attitude.” Published for the British Society of Aesthetics by Oxford
University Press 39:4 (1999), 392-399.
26.Leddy, Thomas. “Practical George and Aesthete Jerome meet The Aesthetic Object.” The Southern Journal
of Philosophy 28:1 (1990), 37-53.
27.Mitscherling, Jeff. “The Aesthetic Experience and The ‘Truth’ of Art.” The British Journal of Aesthetic
28:1 (1988).
28.New , Christopher. “Scruton on the aesthetic attitude.” The British Journal of Aesthetic 19, 320-330.
29.Price, Kingsley. “The Truth About Psychical Distance.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, (1977),
411-423.
30.Price, Kingsley. “What Makes An Experience Aesthetic?” The British Journal of Aesthetics 19 (1979), 131-
143.
31.Rogerson, Kenneth F.. “Dickie's Disinterest” Philosophia 17 (1987), 149-160.
32.Saxena, Sushil Kumar. “The Aesthetic Attitude Debate: Reply to Some New Criticism.” Philosophy East and
West 30 (1980), 265-271.
33.Saxena, Sushil Kumar. “The aesthetic attitude.” Philosophy East and West 28:1 (1978), 81-90.
34.Shusterman, Richard. “Dewey's Art as Experience: The Psychological Background.” The Journal of
Aesthetic Education 44:1 (2010), 26-43.
35.Snoeyenbos, Milton H.. “Saxena on the aesthetic attitude.” Philosophy East and West 29 (1979), 99-101.
36.Stecker, Robert. Aesthetics Today: A Reader. Maryland: Lanhan, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010.
37.Stolnitz, Jerome ”’The Aesthetic Attitude’ in the Rise of Modern Aesthetics.” Journal of Aesthetics and
Art Criticism (1978), 409-421.
38.Stolnitz, Jerome. “Afterwords Criticism and Countertheses ’The Aesthetic Attitude’ in the Rise of
Modern Aesthetics-again.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism (1984), 205-208.
39.Stolnitz, Jerome. “On the Origins Of ‘Aesthetic Disinterestedness’.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art
Criticism 20 (1961), 131-143.
40.Stolnitz, Jerome. “Some Questions Concerning Aesthetic Perception.” Philosophy and Phenomenological
Research 22 (1961), 69-87.
41.Stolnitz, Jerome. ”On the Formal Structure of Esthetic Theory.” Philosophy and Phenomenological
Research 12 (1952), 346-364.
42.Stolnitz, Jerome. Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art Criticism. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1960.
43.Tomas, Vincent. “Aesthetic Vision.” The Philosophical Review 68:1 (1959), 52-67.
44.Tomas, Vincent. “Ducasse on Art and Its Appreciation.” International Phenomenological Society 13:1
(1952), 69-83.
45.Tomas, Vincent. “Mr. Stolnitz’s Questions Concerning Aesthetic Vision: A Reply.” Philosophy and
Phenomenological Research 22:1 (1961), 89-91.
46.Townesend, Dabney. “From Shaftesbury to Kant: The Development of the Concept of Aesthetic Experience.”
Journal of the History of Ideas 48 (1987), 287-305.
47.Eliseo Vivas, “A Definition of The Esthetic Experience,” the Research Committee of the University of
Wisconsin(1936). the American Philosophical Association, (1937), 22-24.
48.Vivas, Eliseo. “Animadversions on Imitation and Expression.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art
Criticism 19 (1961), 425-432.
49.Vivas, Eliseo. “Contextualism Reconsidered.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 18, 222-240.
50.Roger Kamien,《音樂認識與欣賞》王美珠、洪崇焜、黃瑞芬、陳美鸞、楊湘玲譯(臺灣:麗文文化事業有限公司,2005)。
51.史偉民,〈審美態度理論的再批判〉,《揭諦》26,27-58。
52.朱立元等,《西方美學通史》(上海:文藝出版社,1999),第六、七卷:二十世紀美學(上下冊)。
53.朱光潛,《文藝心理學》(臺北:金楓出版社,1987)。
54.朱狄,《當代西方美學》(臺北:谷風出版社,1988)。
55.李長俊,《西洋美術史綱要》(臺北:雄獅圖書公司,2001)。
56.范明生,《西方美學通史》(上海:文藝出版社,1999),第三卷:十七十八世紀美學。
57.康德,《判斷力批判》鄧曉芒譯(北京:人民出版社,2002)。
58.曹俊峰等,《西方美學通史》(上海:文藝出版社,1999),第四卷:德國古典美學。
59.凱‧埃‧吉爾伯特、赫‧庫恩,《美學史》夏乾丰譯(上海:譯文出版社,1989),上冊。
60.黑格爾,《美學》朱光潛譯(北京:商務印書館,2010),第一卷。
61.劉昌元,《西方美學導論》(臺北:聯經出版社,1991)。


 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE