研究生: |
許尹鏵 Yin-Hua Hsu |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
桑塔亞那(G. Santayana)的美學思想及其在教育美學上之蘊義 George Santayana's Aesthetics Thought and Its Significance In Aesthetics of Education |
指導教授: |
林逢祺
Lin, Ferng-Chyi |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
教育學系 Department of Education |
論文出版年: | 2012 |
畢業學年度: | 100 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 176 |
中文關鍵詞: | 桑塔亞那 、教育美學 、美感 、藝術中的理性 、自然主義美學 |
英文關鍵詞: | George Santayana, aesthetic education, The Sense of Beauty, Reason in Art, naturalistic aesthetics |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:494 下載:31 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
本研究旨在探討美國哲學家George Santayana的美學思想及其在教育美學上之價值,透過詮釋學與分析哲學之方法,先瞭解其生平、所處的時代脈絡、概覽整體思想背景及重要性。其次,觸及其美學思想層面,討論其濃厚自然主義氣息的美學思想,及承繼並修正Kant的美學思想;初步瞭解其美學思想後,簡要介紹其主要美學著作《美感》(The Sense of Beauty)一書的內涵,以為第四章論美感之基礎;並簡要說明其前後其審美觀點之轉變。
進而,深入其美學思想核心,分為兩部分探究:其一為論美感,依序討論Santayana對美的性質、素材、形式及表現之看法,並介紹其對遊戲的獨特觀點;其二為論藝術的內涵與品味,分為藝術的內涵、類型與美感品味之形成三面向作研討,得知Santayana的美學思想重視感官、聯想、理性之運作,及各種藝術類型之適切呈現,此將有助於形塑審美經驗及品味之培育。
綜合前述研究,本研究提出Santayana的美學思想於教育美學上之三點啓發,以作為臺灣美育發展之參考。
一、教育的本質及目的的美感面向:教育是場充滿意外的冒險;教育兼含創造與破壞面向;教育過程需要理性與感性相輔相成;教育即愛的展現;其目的為追求自然理性的快樂,並使人成為他自己。
二、教師即詩人的美感角色:教師須成為喜愛旅行、化腐朽為神奇、重視感官經驗、從生活中培養浪漫情懷、擁有豐富知識、能持續拓展自身視野且不斷提升自身心靈等多種詩人形象。
三、學生美感經驗的塑造:藉由喚醒學生使用感官知覺、激發學生聯想能力、適切呈現音樂、圖像、神話、故事、詩、遊戲等素材以塑造其美感經驗。
This thesis explores American philosopher George Santayana's thinking on Aesthetics and its Significance in the aesthetics of education. The hermeneutics and analytic philosophy method was used to analyze the background of George Santayana and the significance of his attribution on the aesthetics of education. Second, this thesis discusses George Santayana’s naturalistic aesthetic ideas, which inherited and corrected Kant's aesthetic thought. Then George Santayana’s main aesthetic writing “The Sense of Beauty” was introduced as the basis to illustrate the changes of his aesthetic views from the earlier to the later time.
The core of George Santayana’s aesthetic ideas can be divided into two parts: One is the beauty. This part discusses his views on the nature, material, form and expression of beauty, and introduces his unique perspective on play. The other is the different aspects of the meaning of art and taste, including the art of content and type, and the cultivation of aesthetic taste. In sum, George Santayana’s aesthetic ideas emphasize on the operation of senses, imagination and reason, and a variety of art types. These findings can be use to promote people’s aesthetic experience and taste.
In order to establish aesthetics education in Taiwan, there are three key findings can be used:
1.Education is an unexpected adventure, which includes the dimensions of creation and destruction. The educational process employs sense and sensibility as an expression of love. The aim of education is the pursuit of natural and reasonable happiness, and leads people to be themselves in the end.
2.Teachers should be poets. They must love to travel, turn stones into gold, focus on sensory experiences, cultivate romantic character in life, own a wealth of knowledge, continue to broaden their own horizons and elevate their minds.
3.Teachers must evoke students’ sensory perception, stimulate students' imagination, and cultivate their aesthetic experiences via adequately utilizing a variety of materials, such as music, images, myths, stories, poems, and plays.
中文資料
王怡婷(2008)。杜威(John Dewey)美學理論及其在教學藝術上的應用。國立臺灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
王俊斌、馮朝霖(2003)。詮釋學的發展與教育哲學。載於邱兆偉(主編),當代教育哲學(頁91-127)。台北市:師大書苑。
王濟昌(譯)(1986)。G. Santayana著。森塔亞納美學箋註(The sense of beauty)。台北市:業強。
朱光潛(1983)。論美與美感。台北:世華文化。
朱光潛(1987a)。談美。台北:金楓。
朱光潛(1987b)。西方美學的源頭。台北:金楓。
朱光潛(2003)。文藝心理學。台北:頂淵文化。
吳文勇(譯)(1988)。H. G. Gadamer著。真理與方法(Wahrheit und methode)。台北市:南方。
余光中(1984)。英詩譯作。台北市:大林。
李奉儒(2004)。教育哲學:分析取向。台北市:揚智。
李軍(2010)。淺析自然主義美學【電子版】。當代小說(下),10,48-49。
杜若洲(譯)(1972)。G. Santayana著。美感(The sense of beauty)。台北市:晨鐘。
但昭偉(2003)。分析哲學與分析的教育哲學。載於邱兆偉(主編),當代教育哲學(頁37-59)。台北市:師大書苑。
李澤厚(1996)。美學四講。台北:三民。
林子勛(編)(1983)。中華百科全書-美國哲學。2012年5月30日,取自http://ap6.pccu.edu.tw/Encyclopedia/data.asp?id=480
周珮儀(2010)。麥當勞化課程的省思。教育學刊,34,1-31。
林逢祺(2004)。教育規準論。台北市:五南。
林逢祺(2010a)。教育規準論(第二版)。台北市:五南。
林逢祺(2010b)。教學的「遊戲」結構。載於黃政傑(主編),教學藝術(頁27-43)。台北市:五南。
林逢祺(2011,11月)。知覺優先論:教學裡的「覺得」與「懂得」。載於國家教育研究院舉辦之「美感經驗的探索與建構—教育與美學的對話」學術論壇會議論文集(頁9-16),台北市。
邱藝鴻、蕭萍(譯)(2005)。G. Santayana著。英倫獨語(Soliloquies in England and later soliloquies)。台北市:邊城。
姚一葦(1985)。美的範疇論(第三版)。:台北市:臺灣開明書店。
洪如玉(2004)。梅洛龐蒂思想在審美教育上的意義──從〈塞尚的疑惑〉談起。國民教育研究學報,12,41-59。
洪漢鼎(2008a)。當代分析哲學導論。台北市:五南。
洪漢鼎(2008b)。當代哲學詮釋學導論。台北市:五南。
袁義江、趙廉(1995)。論桑塔耶那的自然主義美學。社科縱橫,3,9-13。2012年5月10日,取自http://www.lw23.com/paper_151844341/
許宏儒(2008)。Bourdieu文化資本概念對藝術品味的分析及其在教育上的啟思【電子版】。慈濟大學教育研究學刊,4,105-141。
張恆正(譯)(2000)。W. Durant(著)。哲學的故事(下)(The story of philosophy)。台北市:鼎達實業。
陳定家(2003)。從“客觀化快感”說到“直觀本質”論—Santayana美學思想的發展歷程一瞥【電子版】。江蘇社會科學,3,126-130。
陸建德(2005)。一位西班牙人在英美。載於邱藝鴻、蕭萍(譯),英倫獨語(Soliloquies in England and later soliloquies)(頁7-21)。台北市:邊城。
國家出版社編譯組(譯)(1982)。W. Durant(著)。西方哲學史話(The story of philosophy)。台北市:國家。
郭博文(1986)。桑達雅納的道德哲學。哲學論評,9,43-63,。
郭博文(1987)。桑達雅納的批判實在論。文史哲學報,35,71-94。
陸敬忠(2004)。哲學詮釋學—歷史、義理與對話之「生化」辯證。台北市:五南。
陳錦惠(2004)。教學歷程中教師的美感經驗。國立臺北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
黃書敬(譯)(1989)。G. Santayana著。桑他耶那自傳 (Person and Places)。
台北市:水牛。
馮朝霖(2000)。化混沌之情、原天地之美—從情意教育到教育美學,載於崔光宙、林逢祺(主編),教育美學(頁1-31)。台北市:五南。
溫明麗(2010)。教育哲語-愛默生的智慧(Emerson’s wisdom)。教育資料與研究
雙月刊,97,131-134。
楊鎮富(譯)(2002)。P. Senge等著。學習型學校(上)-第五項修練教育篇(Schools
that learn-A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone
who cares about education)。台北市:天下文化。
賈馥茗(2009)。教育美學。台北市:五南。
劉昌元(1978)。桑他雅納「美感」評論。中華文化復興月刊,11(11),66-71。
劉昌元(2005)。西方美學導論(第二版)。台北市:聯經。
蔣勳(2008)。身體美學。台北市:遠流。
錢鍾書(1997)。錢鍾書散文。浙江省:浙江文藝。
欒棟、關寶豔(譯)(1990)。D. Huismann著。美學。台北市:遠流。
英文資料
Arnett, W. E. (1969). Santayana and the sense of beauty. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.
Ashmore, J. (1966). Santayana, art, and aesthetics. Cleveland: Press of Western Reserve University.
Blau, J. L. (1952). Men and movements in American philosophy. New York:
Prentice-Hall.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(Original work published 1945)
Cooper, D. E. (Ed.). (1992). A companion to aesthetics. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Dewey, J. (1998). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Durant, W. (1961). The story of philosophy: The lives and opinions of the greater philosophers. New York: Pocket library.
Eisner, E. W. (1994). The educational imagination: On the design of evaluation of
school program(3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Eisner, E. W. (2004). What can education learn from the arts about the practice of education? International Journal of Education & the Arts, 5(4). Retrieved November 24, 2011, from http://www.ijea.org/v5n4/
Encyclopædia Britannica. (n. d.). Retrieved May, 31, 2012, from
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/523188/George-Santayana
Fisch, M. H. (Ed.) (1995). Classical American philosophy. New York: Fordham University Press.
Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage (P. Clarke, Trans). Lanham: Rowman&Littelfield.
Gallagher, S. (1992). The nature of hermeneutics and its relevance to educational
theory. In Hermeneutics and Education (pp. 1-29). New York: State University
of New York Press.
Guyer, P. (2005). History of modern aesthetics. In J. Levinson (Ed.), The oxford handbook of aesthetics (pp. 25-60). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hodder, A. (1897). Review of the sense of beauty, being the outlines of aesthetic theory. Psychological Review, 4(4), 439-441.
Lachs, J. (1988). George Santayana. Boston: Twayne.
Margolis, J. (1957). Book reviews: Santayana and the sense of beauty. The Journal of Philosophy, 54(14), 450-453.
McCormick, J. (1987). George Santayana: A biography. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Mothersill, M. (2008). Beauty Restored. In S. M. Cahn & A. Meskin (eds.), Aesthetics: A comprehensive anthology (pp. 509-520). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Nauman, St. E., Jr. (1972). Dictionary of American philosophy. New York: Philosophical Library.
Pedersen, A. M. (1995). The authority of things: The sense of beauty. In The aesthetics of allegory in George Santayana (pp. 11-42). Retrieved May, 30, 2012, from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304228565http://search.proquest.com/docview/304228565
Santayana, G. (1900). Interpretations of poetry and religion. London: Adam and Charles Black.
Santayana, G. (1910). Three philosophical poets. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Santayana, G. (1925). The mutability of aesthetic category. The Philosophical Review, 34(3), 281-291.
Santayana, G. (1942). Realms of being: One-volume edition. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Santayana, G. (1953). The life of reason, or the phases of human progress. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Santayana, G. (1955a). The sense of beauty: being the outlines of aesthetic theory. New York: Modern Library.
Santayana, G. (1955b). Scepticism and animal faith: Introduction to a system of philosophy. New York: Dover.
Santayana, G. (1986). Persons and places: Fragments of autobiography ( W. G. Holzberger & H. J. Saatkamp, Eds.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press。
Santayana, G. (1988). The sense of beauty: Being the outlines of aesthetic theory ( W. G. Holzberger & H. J. Saatkamp, Eds.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press。
Santayana, G. (2005). The life of reason. Retrived Octber 15, 2011, from http://www.wikipremed.com/reading/philosophy/The_Life_of_Reason.pdf
Schneider, H. W. (1957). A history of American philosophy. New York: Forum Books.
Singer, I. (1957). Santayana's aesthetics; a critical introduction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Stuhr, J. J. (Ed.). (1987). Classical American philosophy: Essential readings and interpretive essays. New York: Oxford University Press.
The free dictionary. (n. d.). Retrieved September, 30, 2011, from http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Santayana,+George
Tillman, F. A. & Cahn, S. M. (Eds.). (1969). Philosophy of art and aesthetics, from Plato to Wittgenstein. New York: Harper & Row.
Timothy, L. S. S. (1974). Santayana: An examination of his philosophy. London ;
Boston: Routledge & K. Paul.
Winn, R. B. (Ed.). (1968). American philosophy. New York: Greenwood Press.