从对学科制度的批判看音乐美学学科归属问题

发布时间：2018-01-23 01:56

本文关键词： 学科制度合法性音乐美学感性认识　出处：《音乐艺术(上海音乐学院学报)》2008年03期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：本文试图跳出传统学科分类思维方式,在后现代语境下探讨音乐美学的学科归属问题。从福柯对科学规训后现代批判,华勒斯坦对学科制度的历史性反思和斯皮瓦克对学科制度的后殖民批判入手,首先探讨学科制度的合法性问题,近而从黑格尔和中国音乐美学界的SOS的呼救中引入音乐美学是否科学的问题,得出音乐美学并不具有现代意义的科学所坚守的理性特征,而相反它是以感性认识为研究对象的。因此从学科制度的合法性和音乐美学的研究对象来看,音乐美学是反学科制度规训的,它的真正意义是以音乐作为超生物性肢体最终回归生命,重建感性的认知方式。最后,证明音乐美学虽然不能够进入科学理性的领域,但是实际上它是比科学更具合法性的认知方式,它能够唤醒我们丢失已久的人之所以为人的东西,因为,生命是被感知的。
[Abstract]:This paper attempts to jump out of the traditional way of thinking of subject classification, subject category of music aesthetics in the postmodern context. From Foucault to the scientific discipline of postmodern criticism, postcolonial critique of Wallace Tan of the discipline institution of historical reflection and Spivak on the subject of the system, first discusses the legitimacy of the discipline institution, from the past Hagel and China music aesthetic field SOS for introduction of music aesthetics is scientific problems, the rational characteristics of music aesthetics does not adhere to the modern science, and it is contrary to perceptual knowledge as the research object. From the research object and discipline system and the legitimacy of the music aesthetics, music aesthetics is the anti discipline system of the discipline, its real significance is to music as a super biological body eventually return to life, rebuild the cognitive perceptual. Finally, prove that music Although aesthetics is not able to enter the field of scientific rationality, it is actually a more legitimate way of cognition than science. It can wake up what we have lost for a long time, because life is perceived.

【作者单位】：西安音乐学院;
【分类号】：J601
【正文快照】： 关于音乐美学的学科归属问题一直是国内学者争论的一个焦点,即对音乐美学应不应该成为一门独立的学科的探讨。这个问题,在进一步深入实际上就是音乐美学能不能进入现代知识科学体系的问题的探讨。而在西方后现代思潮的影响下,如今关于这一问题的思考也以另一种与传统相异的思

【参考文献】