摘要
张法认为,中国美学史研究有三种模式——教材型、范畴型、跨学科型,有两个方向——由王国维以来的重从古代材料本身的性质而进行总结,由朱光潜以来的把西方美学原理的延伸到中国古代;因而,如何把多元一体中的多元包括进来,如何思考古代概念的虚实合一性质对理论表述的影响,是它在演进中一直被忽视的问题。朱良志认为,道禅哲学关于美是不可分析的观念,反映了中国美学重体验、重生命超越的鲜明特色,体现出中国美学在长期发展过程中与西方美学的不同旨趣,也从一个侧面展现出中国人在很早的时候就对美的核心问题有深邃的思考。陈望衡认为,在全球化的今天实际上只有一种美学,那就是全球美学;就当代中国美学的建设来说,需要建立的不是独立的与世界隔绝的中国美学,而是具有中国特色的全球美学;如果不是只看重美学学科框架比较,而是更看重美学学科精神的相通,中国古典美学与世界美学的接轨则会容易得多。
Zhang Fa proposes that there are three modes in the Chinese studies of the history of aesthetics, i. e. , textbooks, categories, and interdisciplinary studies. Also, there are two dimensions, i. e. , arriving in conclusions by studying the characteristics of the ancient Chinese materials, or extending the principles of Western aesthetics to the ancient Chinese times. Anyhow, one issue which has been neglected in its evolution is how to include multiple elements into one entity, and how to think about the influence of the unity of the imagined and the real upon a theoretical discourse. Zhu Liangzhi holds that Daoist and Zenist philosophies believe that aesthetics is beyond analysis, which reflects that they lay emphasis on experience and life tran- scendence. It is quite different from the Western aesthetics. Chen Wangheng believes that in the globalization of today there is only one aesthetics, i. e. , the global aesthetics. So it is important to lay emphasis on the communication of the essence of aesthetics, so as to reach a unification between Chinese classical aesthetics and the aesthetics of the world.
出处
《学术月刊》
CSSCI
北大核心
2011年第8期16-21,共6页
Academic Monthly
