本文主要介紹並討論法國哲學家李克爾 (Paul Ricoeur, 1913-2005) 的藝術理論，其中包含了他對音樂的看法，主要根據的文獻是他在 1983~1985年出版的《時間與敘事文》(Time and Narrative) 以及 1995~1996年的兩篇美學對話錄。 基本上，李克爾主張一種解釋學的美學進路，而反對藝術社會學的進路，認為藝術可以超越它的時空脈絡，而獲得一種永恆性，吾人對於藝術應當注重其對觀眾（讀者、聽眾）之世界觀與行動重新塑造的功能，亦即藝術有其指向未來的目的性功能，而不應當拘泥於對藝術品回顧式的歷史性分析。 另外，基於其個人品味，他非常喜歡二十世紀的抽象繪畫與雕刻，也喜歡維也納學派的十二音列的音樂。他主張「與再現決裂」，反而使藝術重塑觀眾的能力達到頂點。 本文論證，李克爾在美學對話錄中所展現的理論與其在《時間與敘事文》中所發展出的美學模型顯示出不一致的情形，這代表他的前後期美學理論之間呈現出一種不連續性。

This essay introduces, discusses and criticizes Paul Ricoeur’s theory of art and music. Basically, Ricoeur advocates the hermeneutical approach to aesthetics and rejects the approach of sociology of art. He maintains that art transcends its temporal and spatial context of production, and attains a sempiternal status. What we should emphasize concerning art is on its ability to refigure the worldview and actions of its receiver, rather than on analyzing the material and socio-economical conditions of its production, which is basically retrospective. He insists upon the teleological prospective toward art. On the other hand, Ricoeur endorse the break with representation of abstract painting and sculpture of 20th century, maintaining that the ability of art to refigure is strongest when it is absolutely free of any representation of the world. It is argued that Ricoeur’s later aesthetic theses are inconsistent with the aesthetic model developed in his Time and Narrative (1983-5). This shows that to some degree Ricoeur does not pursue the same line of reasoning in Time and Narrative and the two aesthetic dialogues conducted during 1995-96.