论文部分内容阅读
存在主义解释学家──海德格尔，以其睿智的思维对西方自苏格拉底以来，两千多年的形而上学传统进行了尖锐而彻底的批判。本文中关于德罗在《美之根源及性质的哲学研究》一文中对“美本质”的解释，与海德格尔在《艺术品的本源》一文中对艺术本性、艺术作品本性的逆向追问，恰成鲜明的对比，孰是孰非一目了然。此外，海德格尔对传统思维的三种知解方式“特征的载体”“感觉的复合体”和“有形的质科”的批判，可说是对传统思维的一次最沉重的打击，他精到的分析令人起敬。海德格尔正是在克服传统思维的过程中，提出了自己独具特色的“存在”本体论。并在此基础上阐明了自己的艺术思想。他通过扬弃传统思维追问所有的艺术作品的思考方式，转而从凡高的绘画──《一双农鞋》进行考察，并用优美的语言表达了凡高油画的真正含义。这使他惊奇地发现，在艺术品中存在的“真理”，恰是他追问的与传统思维相抗衡的“真理”，而且这一“真理”也与已经过时了模仿说理解的“真理”截然不同。最后，海德格尔为了不使人们误解，特意地从词源学上考察了“真理”一词在古希腊人那里的原初含义。它使我们明白，“真理”的本性原初是相克性、超越性和敞开性，以此来理解艺术，实在是再恰当不过了。于是他大胆地得出结论?
Existentialist theorist, Heidegger, sharply and thoroughly criticized the two thousand years of metaphysical traditions of the West since Socrates with its wise thinking. In this article, Deluo’s interpretation of the “beauty of nature” in his article “The Philosophical Study of the Roots and Nature of the Beauty”, and Heidegger’s reverse questioning on the nature of art and the nature of the artwork in his article “The Origin of Works of Art” Just a sharp contrast, what is right and wrong at a glance. In addition, Heidegger’s criticism of the three modes of traditional thinking, “characteristic carrier”, “sensory complex” and “physical quality subject”, can be said to be the most severe blow to traditional thinking. To the analysis is respectable. It is precisely in the process of overcoming the traditional thinking that Heidegger proposed his own unique “existence” ontology. And on this basis, clarified his artistic thought. By abandoning the traditional way of thinking and asking all the way of thinking of works of art, he went on to examine Van Gogh’s paintings, “A Pair of Farmers’ Shoes,” and used beautiful language to express the true meaning of Van Gogh’s painting. This surprised him that the “truth” that exists in artwork is exactly the “truth” that he queried to contend with traditional thinking, and this “truth” is also similar to the “truth” that has been outdated and imitated, Different. Finally, in order not to mislead people, Heidegger examines etymologically the original meaning of the word “truth” in the ancient Greeks. It makes us understand that it is quite appropriate to understand art in the nature of “truth”, which was originally gurus, transcendence and openness. So he boldly concluded?