康德崇高范畴与中国古代壮美、阳刚、雄浑范畴的比较

发布时间：2018-06-06 20:48

本文选题：康德 + 崇高　；参考：《延安大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：康德崇高理论对整个西方崇高理论的形成和完善起到了十分重要的作用，把康德崇高范畴作为典型，将它和中国古典文论中的壮美、阳刚、雄浑范畴进行比较研究，是切实可行并且有意义的。本文重点分析了以下几方面的问题: 第一，康德崇高范畴与壮美范畴的比较。在中国美学史中，壮美作为一个独立的审美范畴是由王国维以西方美学中关于崇高的理论糅合中国古代美学中的阴阳刚柔说熔铸而成的。康德的崇高范畴不等同于中国古代的壮美范畴，首先从外部形态上来看，崇高具有一种险峻的气势，而壮美则表现出一种壮阔的外观；其次从审美效果来看，康德所论的崇高带给审美主体的是一种复杂的掺杂着痛感、恐惧、敬畏、惊心的审美感受，而壮美则带给人一种昂扬奋发的不含痛感的豪迈感；最后从主体来看，康德崇高理论揭示的是人的本质力量的否定性结果的转化过程，而壮美论揭示的则是实践对人的本质力量的肯定性的实现。第二，康德崇高范畴与阳刚理论的比较。作为中国传统美学范畴，阳刚，即阳刚之美，是指一种雄伟劲健的艺术风格，姚鼐的阳刚理论颇有代表性。康德崇高理论与姚鼐阳刚理论有相通之处，但从其所属语境看,二者之间确实有很大差异。康德崇高与姚鼐阳刚之美的本质根源不同，且崇高与优美的关系和阳刚与阴柔的关系也不同。第三，康德崇高范畴与雄浑范畴的比较。雄浑与崇高都具有力量上“大”和“猛”两个特点,且都强调主体必须具有高尚的心灵和高昂的激情，这是二者的相似之处。二者的不同之处在于康德论崇高时强调崇高作为独立范畴与优美或其它范畴之间的差异，而司空图论雄浑则恰恰相反，他强调各范畴间的和谐统一。中西方掌握范畴的不同思维方式和不同的宗教文化渊源导致了中西崇高理论的不同。而在崇高精神失落的后现代社会，中西崇高范畴比较研究依然具有理论价值和现实意义，在审美实践中归复崇高应有的地位，对于改善当前人类所面临的严峻的生态问题和伦理问题具有重要的现实意义。
[Abstract]:Kant's sublime theory has played a very important role in the formation and perfection of the whole western sublime theory. Kant's sublime category is taken as a typical example and compared with the magnificent, masculine and powerful categories in Chinese classical literary theory. This paper focuses on the following aspects: first, the comparison between Kant's sublime category and magnificent category. In the history of Chinese aesthetics, splendor, as an independent aesthetic category, was formed by the fusion of Wang Guowei's theory of sublime in western aesthetics. The sublime category of Kant is not equal to the category of magnificent beauty in ancient China. First of all, from the external form, the sublime has a precipitous momentum, and the magnificent beauty shows a magnificent appearance, and then from the aesthetic effect, Kant's theory of sublimity brings to the aesthetic subject a complex aesthetic feeling mixed with pain, fear, awe, and surprise, while grandeur brings a heroic feeling without pain; finally, from the subject's point of view, What Kant's sublime theory reveals is the process of transforming the negative result of human's essential power, while the theory of splendor reveals the realization of practice's affirmation of human's essential power. Second, the comparison between Kant's sublime category and masculine theory. As a traditional Chinese aesthetic category, masculinity, that is, the beauty of masculinity, refers to a magnificent and vigorous artistic style. Yao Nai's theory of masculinity is quite representative. Kant's sublime theory has something in common with Yao Nai's masculine theory, but it is quite different from Yao Nai's masculine theory. The essence of Kant's sublime and Yao Nai's masculine beauty is different, and the relation between sublime and graceful and masculine and feminine is also different. Third, the comparison between Kant's sublime category and powerful category. Both majesty and sublime have the characteristics of "great" and "fierce" in strength, and both emphasize that the subject must have noble heart and high passion, which is the similarity between the two. The difference between the two is that Kant emphasizes the difference between sublimity as an independent category and beauty or other categories when discussing sublimity. He emphasized the harmony and unity among different categories, and the different thinking modes and religious cultural origins of Chinese and Western countries led to the difference of Chinese and Western lofty theories. In the post-modern society where the lofty spirit is lost, the comparative study of the sublime category between China and the West still has theoretical value and practical significance, and returns to its due position in the aesthetic practice. It is of great practical significance to improve the serious ecological and ethical problems faced by human beings.
【学位授予单位】：延安大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：B83-091

【参考文献】