Пожалуйста, используйте этот идентификатор, чтобы цитировать или ссылаться на этот ресурс: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/21403
Полная запись метаданных
Поле DCЗначениеЯзык
dc.contributor.authorPŁOTKA, WITOLD-
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-09T15:17:54Z-
dc.date.available2020-12-09T15:17:54Z-
dc.date.issued2020-06-
dc.identifier.citationPLOTKA W. BEYOND ONTOLOGY: ON BLAUSTEIN’S RECONSIDERATION OF INGARDEN’S AESTHETICS. Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology, 2020, vol. 9, issue 2, pp. 552–578.en_GB
dc.identifier.otherhttps://doi.org/10.21638/2226-5260-2020-9-2-552-578-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11701/21403-
dc.description.abstractThe article addresses the popular reading of Ingarden that his aesthetic theory is determined by ontology. This reading seems to suggest that, firstly, aesthetics lacks its autonomy, and, secondly, the subject of aesthetic experience is reproductive, and passive. The author focuses on Ingarden’s aesthetics formulated by him in the period of 1925–1944. Moreover, the study presents selected elements of Ingarden’s phenomenology of aesthetic experience, and by doing so, the author aims at showing how Ingarden’s aesthetics was reconsidered by Blaustein, a student of Ingarden, whose theory seems to lead one beyond the scope of ontology. Blaustein, namely, reconsiders Ingarden’s theory of purely intentional objects by interpreting it in a descriptive-psychological, or phenomenological fashion. The article is divided into four parts. In section 1, the author highlights historical interconnections between Ingarden, and Blaustein. Section 2.1. is devoted to Ingarden’s phenomenological approach towards aesthetic experience as a phasic structure. At this basis, in section 2.2., Ingarden’s early theory of intentional objects is to be discussed. Section 3 concerns Blaustein’s contribution to phenomenology of aesthetic experience. Given that Blaustein formulates his theory in discussion with Ingarden, section 3.1. is devoted to Blaustein’s critical assessment of Ingarden’s method, and aesthetics. Next, in section 3.2., the author presents Blaustein’s original theory of presentations, and its use in aesthetics. Finally, in section 4, the author lists similarities, and differences between Blaustein’s and Ingarden’s aesthetic theories.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipThe project was held within the research grant on “The Presence of Kazimierz Twardowski’s Thought in Early Phenomenology in Poland” financed by the National Science Centre, Poland within the OPUS program (No. 2017/27/B/HS1/02455).en_GB
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherSt Petersburg State Universityen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseriesHorizon. Studies in Phenomenology;Volume 9; Issue 2-
dc.subjectaesthetic experienceen_GB
dc.subjectdescriptive psychologyen_GB
dc.subjectpurely intentional objecten_GB
dc.subjecttheory of presentationsen_GB
dc.subjectIngardenen_GB
dc.subjectBlausteinen_GB
dc.titleBEYOND ONTOLOGY: ON BLAUSTEIN’S RECONSIDERATION OF INGARDEN’S AESTHETICSen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
Располагается в коллекциях:Issue 2

Файлы этого ресурса:
Файл Описание РазмерФормат 
552-578.pdf684,83 kBAdobe PDFПросмотреть/Открыть


Все ресурсы в архиве электронных ресурсов защищены авторским правом, все права сохранены.