思辨的与经验的研究——艺术史的两种方法

发布时间：2018-01-13 05:20

本文关键词：思辨的与经验的研究——艺术史的两种方法　出处：《东南大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2015年02期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：作为艺术史叙事的两种方法,"自上而下"的思辨与参照科学方法的经验研究有着不同的起点、路径和目标,体现出"阐释的"科学与"物的科学"的不同特点。"自上而下"是基于一套先验理论,将艺术史放置到既定的理论框架中,通过逻辑思辨和严谨推理来建构概念;而经验研究立足于一系列科学观念和方法论,通过搜集第一手资料,从具体艺术作品和艺术现象出发,归纳和总结出一定规律。两种艺术史方法既有着矛盾冲突,又不可避免地产生交集。因为艺术史方法的多样性和艺术史本身缺乏永久的有效性,在不同的历史阶段,总会有一个占据相对主导地位的艺术史方法会产生更大影响,但是这种主导性的影响并不妨碍其他方法共同发挥作用。总体而言,逻辑推理和理论阐释在当今艺术史发展中仍具有不可忽视的影响力。
[Abstract]:As two methods of art history narration, the thinking of "top-down" has different starting points, paths and goals from the empirical study of scientific methods. "top-down" is based on a set of transcendental theory to put art history in the established theoretical framework. Construct the concept through logical reasoning and rigorous reasoning; The empirical research is based on a series of scientific concepts and methodologies, through the collection of first-hand information, from the specific works of art and art phenomenon. Sum up and sum up certain laws. The two methods of art history have not only contradiction and conflict, but also inevitable intersection, because of the diversity of art history methods and the lack of permanent validity of art history itself. At different stages of history, there is always a relatively dominant art history method that will have a greater impact, but this dominant influence does not prevent other methods from working together. Overall. Logical reasoning and theoretical interpretation still play an important role in the development of art history.
【作者单位】：南京大学艺术研究院;
【分类号】：J110.9
【正文快照】： 今天看来,一部好的艺术史既反映着具有普遍意义的历史意识,又能体现出史学家的个性风格。豪塞尔从社会史角度将个人的成就及行为举止看做是“他们天赋才能和所处境况两者共同的结果”,[1]点明艺术史研究具有复杂的整体与个体、历史与现实的背景。史学家通过对主体、客体及其辩

【共引文献】