Literaturoznawcza analiza/interpretacja krytyczna: Józef Tischner Myślenie z wnętrza metafory versus Bartłomiej Maliszewski Metafora i aksjologia wzorzec człowieka w renesansowej literaturze parenetycznej

Q4 Arts and Humanities Przestrzenie Teorii Pub Date : 2022-12-30 DOI:10.14746/pt.2022.37.14
K. Obremski
{"title":"Literaturoznawcza analiza/interpretacja krytyczna: Józef Tischner Myślenie z wnętrza metafory versus Bartłomiej Maliszewski Metafora i aksjologia wzorzec człowieka w renesansowej literaturze parenetycznej","authors":"K. Obremski","doi":"10.14746/pt.2022.37.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Józef Tischner’s Myślenie z wnętrza metafory [Thinking From Within the Metaphor] and Bartłomiej Maliszewski’s Metafora i aksjologia [Metaphor and Axiology] are texts that are both described (analysed) and interpreted here. However, the debatability of the dual understanding of metaphor (‘inside’ – ‘outside’) is only a preliminary difficulty. For it will be incomparably more important that when we read Thinking From Within the Metaphor, then we will not find an explanation of the authorial meaning attributed to the after all key term of his text, and this is by no means a coincidence. The fundamental opposition – unambiguous genre language versus axiological and agathological analogical (metaphorical, symbolic) language – is certainly a persuasive construction, but not necessarily a valid one. A fundamental literary problem: is the Platonic cave really a metaphor? In Bartłomiej Maliszewski’s book Metafora i aksjologia wzorzec człowieka w renesansowej literaturze parenetycznej [Metaphor and Axiology. The Model of Man in Renaissance Parenetic Literature], ‘metaphor’ is equated with the ‘figurative’. There would be nothing reprehensible in this if not for the fact that these two key terms in the book co-create a state of approximate numerical equilibrium, while (and this is more important) proving to be both identical and disjointed. The lack of a definition of ‘metaphor’ and ‘figurative’ makes the whole impressive argument resemble a colossus standing on two legs of clay, over which it stumbles as they become entangled. The legitimacy of the combined view of Thinking From Within the Metaphor and Metaphor and Axiology is contained primarily in the fact that Renaissance parenesis can be seen as one of the historical forms of agathology.","PeriodicalId":37837,"journal":{"name":"Przestrzenie Teorii","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przestrzenie Teorii","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/pt.2022.37.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Józef Tischner’s Myślenie z wnętrza metafory [Thinking From Within the Metaphor] and Bartłomiej Maliszewski’s Metafora i aksjologia [Metaphor and Axiology] are texts that are both described (analysed) and interpreted here. However, the debatability of the dual understanding of metaphor (‘inside’ – ‘outside’) is only a preliminary difficulty. For it will be incomparably more important that when we read Thinking From Within the Metaphor, then we will not find an explanation of the authorial meaning attributed to the after all key term of his text, and this is by no means a coincidence. The fundamental opposition – unambiguous genre language versus axiological and agathological analogical (metaphorical, symbolic) language – is certainly a persuasive construction, but not necessarily a valid one. A fundamental literary problem: is the Platonic cave really a metaphor? In Bartłomiej Maliszewski’s book Metafora i aksjologia wzorzec człowieka w renesansowej literaturze parenetycznej [Metaphor and Axiology. The Model of Man in Renaissance Parenetic Literature], ‘metaphor’ is equated with the ‘figurative’. There would be nothing reprehensible in this if not for the fact that these two key terms in the book co-create a state of approximate numerical equilibrium, while (and this is more important) proving to be both identical and disjointed. The lack of a definition of ‘metaphor’ and ‘figurative’ makes the whole impressive argument resemble a colossus standing on two legs of clay, over which it stumbles as they become entangled. The legitimacy of the combined view of Thinking From Within the Metaphor and Metaphor and Axiology is contained primarily in the fact that Renaissance parenesis can be seen as one of the historical forms of agathology.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
文学分析/批判性解读:Józef Tischner从隐喻的内部思考与Bartłomiej Maliszewski文艺复兴时期文学中人类模式的隐喻和价值论
Józef Tischner的《从隐喻中思考》和Bartłomiej Maliszewski的《隐喻与价值论》都是在这里描述(分析)和解释的文本。然而,隐喻的双重理解(“内”-“外”)的可辩性只是一个初步的困难。因为更重要的是,当我们阅读《从隐喻中思考》时,我们将找不到对其文本中毕竟是关键术语的作者意义的解释,这绝非巧合。基本的对立——明确的类型语言与价值论和动物学的类比(隐喻、象征)语言——当然是一种有说服力的结构,但不一定是有效的。一个根本的文学问题:柏拉图式的洞穴真的是一个隐喻吗?在Bartłomiej Maliszewski的《Metafora i aksjologia wzorzec cz緋owieka w renesansowej literatureze parenetycznej》一书中,“隐喻与价值论。文艺复兴共生文学中的人的模型”将“隐喻”等同于“具象”。如果不是因为书中的这两个关键术语共同创造了一种近似数值平衡的状态,同时(这一点更重要)被证明是相同的和不相交的,那么这就没有什么应受谴责的了。由于缺乏“隐喻”和“比喻”的定义,整个令人印象深刻的论点就像一个巨人站在粘土的两条腿上,当它们纠缠在一起时,它会在上面绊倒。“从隐喻内部思考”与“隐喻与价值论”相结合的观点的合法性主要体现在文艺复兴时期的“实质”可以被视为动物学的历史形式之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Przestrzenie Teorii
Przestrzenie Teorii Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: “Przestrzenie Teorii” is a theoretical and literary journal of scholarly criticism. The journal is peer-reviewed and reflects the research interests of authors from across a wide range of universities in Poland, as well as presents translations of texts of distinguished foreign theoreticians in literature. The journal undertakes to present key and essential problems in the contemporary criticism and theory of literature, and provides a platform for a transdisciplinary dialogue. The published texts, presented in diversified methodological approach, address both aesthetical and poetical problems in different areas of research, encompassing theatre and film, but also drama and art (in particular, visual and performative art forms). The journal is characterized by its interdiciplinary approach, participates in the present-day scholarly discourse in the philosophy of science and attempts to effect its policy of fostering the polyphonic form of literary studies in drama. “Przestrzenie Teorii” is published semi-annually.
期刊最新文献
Multimodalność wtórna i widzialność tomograficzna na przykładzie Nakarmić kamień Bronki Nowickiej Homoeroticism vs Homoaesthetics in the Literary Works of Oles Ulianenko Herbert George Wells. Socjalizm, utopia i melancholia Wspomnienie o Profesorze Stanisławie Balbusie Spłakane deszczem...
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1