经典艺术史对进化论美学、神经艺术史和系统论美学的反思与批判  

Introspection and Criticism on Evolutionary Aesthetics,Neural Art History and Systems Aesthetics from the Standpoint of Classical Art History

作　　者：马修·兰普利 孟凡君(译)[2] 孙翀(译)[3] Matthew Rampley;MENG Fanjun;SUN Chong

机构地区：[1]马萨里克大学艺术学院,捷克布尔诺60177 [2]吉林大学文学院,吉林长春132012 [3]浙江大学人文学院,浙江杭州310058

出　　处：《艺术探索》2021年第4期84-99,共16页Arts Exploration

基　　金：吉林省社会科学基金项目“美育的认知神经机制及对视觉审美教育的启示研究”(2021C102);浙江省社会科学界联合会研究课题“泽基神经美学对当代美学的影响研究”(2021N79)。

摘　　要：19世纪中后期,随着工业革命进程的不断推进,自然科学与人文学科之间的冲突愈演愈烈,贯穿整个20世纪而延续至今。进化论、生物学、神经科学和系统论等自然科学领域的研究成果对人文领域,尤其是艺术史和美学产生了重要影响。研究者有时候严重贬低了人文学科的属性和基本价值,运用自然科学的理念为后者确立研究范式。立足于艺术史的基本事实,批判性地审视“适应性”“模因”“进化树”“系统”等概念的实质及其在艺术和美学研究中的运用,为艺术史寻求独立于科学范式之外的研究方法,努力打破强加于其上的枷锁,成为一项既紧迫又艰巨的任务。对各种科学方法及其艺术研究范式的批判,并非单纯的抵抗行为或者厌恶情绪,而是对于新的艺术与科学研究范式的期待。Since the end of the 19th century,and due to the continuous advancement of the industrial revolution,the conflict between the two cultures has intensified and continued throughout the 20th century.Researchers in such fields related to natural sciences such as evolution,biology,neuroscience,and systems theory have had an important impact on the field of humanities,especially art history and aesthetics.Sometimes,these researchers seriously devalue the scientific attributes and basic values of humanities,resorting instead to concepts of natural science to establish a research paradigm for the latter.Hence,it has become an urgent and arduous task to critically examine the essence of concepts such as"adaptability","memes","evolutionary tree",and"system",and their applications in art and aesthetic research based on basic historical facts,to seek art history research methods that are separated from paradigmatic science,and to strive to break the shackles imposed by them.Criticism of various scientific methods and art research paradigms is not a mere manifestation of a conservative or antagonistic attitude,but an earnest search for new art and scientific research paradigms.

关 键 词：两种文化 艺术史 进化论 适应 模因 神经科学 系统论 

分 类 号：J110.9[艺术—艺术理论]