自然审美“恰当性”辨正  

On the“Appropriateness”of Aesthetic Appreciation of Nature

作　　者：胡友峰[1] 蒋功艳 HU Youfeng;JIANG Gongyan

机构地区：[1]山东大学文艺美学研究中心

出　　处：《社会科学》2024年第4期64-76,共13页Journal of Social Sciences

摘　　要：学界一般认为,自然审美“恰当性”概念是卡尔松提出来的,而事实并非如此。史密斯首先将该概念用于对艺术与自然欣赏方式的“外部”比较;但后来被卡尔松引导至相反方向,转向对自然欣赏“内部”的审美依据进行评判,“恰当性”概念的独断化进程也由此启动。随着独断化蔓延至审美判断和审美实践领域,更多理论混乱接踵而至。造成上述现象的根本原因在于逻辑上的“语义错位”和审美上的“认知决定论”。梳理“恰当性”概念的缘起,可还原“恰当性”作为不同欣赏方式“外部”比较者的原初角色;追溯独断化起点,批判性分析引发该现象的语义错位和认知决定论根源,可以让“恰当性”概念以合理方式承担起对于“审美依据”“审美判断”与“审美实践”的评判者角色,从根本上解决卡尔松造成的该命题的独断化问题,同时推动自然审美研究由单向决定模式向多元交互模式转变。It has been generally held that the concept of“appropriateness”in natural aesthetics was put forward by Allen Carlson,but it was not so.When R.Smith first used the concept to contrast the appreciation of art against that of nature.It was later employed by Carlson to evaluate different bases of nature appreciation,thus starting the dogmatization of“appropriateness”.With the spread of dogmatism to the field of aesthetic judgment and aesthetic practice,more theoretical confusion ensued.The root cause lies in“semantic dislocation”and“cognitive determinism”.By disclosing the origin and subsequent inward turning of the concept of“appropriateness”,the authors restore its primary role as a means to compare different modes of appreciation,enabling future researchers to more accurately apply it to their study of“aesthetic basis”,“aesthetic judgment”and“aesthetic practice”.Salvaging the concept of“appropriateness”from dogmatism will enable the transformation from a unidirectional determinist model to a more plural and interactive model in natural aesthetics.

关 键 词：恰当性 向内转 独断论 认知决定论 多元交互 

分 类 号：I01[文学—文学理论]