再现的美学制度

D. Lloyd
{"title":"再现的美学制度","authors":"D. Lloyd","doi":"10.5422/fordham/9780823282388.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"“The Aesthetic Regime of Representation” focuses on the work of German idealist aesthetic thought in the political context of the bourgeois revolutions of America and France. Analyzing Kant’s Critique of Judgment, it considers the “turn to the aesthetic” as a means of forestalling the immediacy of revolution and installing an implicitly pedagogical and developmental system of representation that defines the human and the political subject as universal and disinterested. That system relies on a notion of common sense that separates the civil subject from the Savage, who remains fixed at the threshold of humanity. The foundations of aesthetic philosophy are at the same time the foundations of a “regime of representation” that offers not a means to inclusion, but a mode of regulating access to recognition as a fully human and politically capable subject.","PeriodicalId":120130,"journal":{"name":"Under Representation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Aesthetic Regime of Representation\",\"authors\":\"D. Lloyd\",\"doi\":\"10.5422/fordham/9780823282388.003.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"“The Aesthetic Regime of Representation” focuses on the work of German idealist aesthetic thought in the political context of the bourgeois revolutions of America and France. Analyzing Kant’s Critique of Judgment, it considers the “turn to the aesthetic” as a means of forestalling the immediacy of revolution and installing an implicitly pedagogical and developmental system of representation that defines the human and the political subject as universal and disinterested. That system relies on a notion of common sense that separates the civil subject from the Savage, who remains fixed at the threshold of humanity. The foundations of aesthetic philosophy are at the same time the foundations of a “regime of representation” that offers not a means to inclusion, but a mode of regulating access to recognition as a fully human and politically capable subject.\",\"PeriodicalId\":120130,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Under Representation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Under Representation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5422/fordham/9780823282388.003.0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Under Representation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5422/fordham/9780823282388.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《表象的美学制度》主要研究德国唯心主义美学思想在美法资产阶级革命政治背景下的工作。在分析康德的《判断力批判》时,它认为“转向美学”是一种手段,它阻止了革命的即时性,并安装了一种隐含的教学和发展的表征系统,该系统将人类和政治主体定义为普遍和无私的。这一制度依赖于一种常识观念,这种观念将公民主体与野蛮人区分开来,野蛮人仍然被固定在人类的门槛上。美学哲学的基础同时也是一种“表征制度”的基础,它提供的不是一种包容的手段,而是一种作为一个完全具有人类和政治能力的主体而规范获得承认的模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Aesthetic Regime of Representation
“The Aesthetic Regime of Representation” focuses on the work of German idealist aesthetic thought in the political context of the bourgeois revolutions of America and France. Analyzing Kant’s Critique of Judgment, it considers the “turn to the aesthetic” as a means of forestalling the immediacy of revolution and installing an implicitly pedagogical and developmental system of representation that defines the human and the political subject as universal and disinterested. That system relies on a notion of common sense that separates the civil subject from the Savage, who remains fixed at the threshold of humanity. The foundations of aesthetic philosophy are at the same time the foundations of a “regime of representation” that offers not a means to inclusion, but a mode of regulating access to recognition as a fully human and politically capable subject.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Frontmatter 4. Representation’s Coup Introduction: Under Representation 3. Race under Representation Index
×
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