Aesthetics and Philosophy of Culture: Aesthetics: Philosophy of Art or Philosophy of Culture?
In: Filozofski vestnik: FV, Band 22, Heft 2, S. 7-20
ISSN: 0353-4510
In: Filozofski vestnik: FV, Band 22, Heft 2, S. 7-20
ISSN: 0353-4510
In: Filozofski vestnik: FV, Band 22, Heft 2, S. 87-110
ISSN: 0353-4510
In: Filozofski vestnik: FV, Band 22, Heft 2, S. 21-42
ISSN: 0353-4510
In: Voprosy Filosofii, Heft 6, S. 152-155
Yu.M. Lotman's creative path from philologist to philosopher was difficult and risky. The scientist resolutely moved away from the mossy traditions of Soviet vulgar sociological literary criticism and began to master modern methods of text analysis developed by structuralism and semiotics. Since structuralism and semiotics were banned in Soviet science as products of bourgeois ideology, Lotman and his colleagues at the Tartu-Moscow School called the subject of their research "secondary modeling systems", to which they referred not only literary texts, but also texts of art, texts of behavior, city, history, etc. Thus, a culturological turn took place in the methodology of Lotman and his associates, which was expressed in the fact that the philosophy of culture became the theoretical basis of structural analysis, and the philosophy of history became the historical and cultural approach. With his works in the field of humanities, Lotman showed that the key to understanding and predicting history is culture, and for building a philosophy of history is the philosophy of culture. Lotman actually acted as a profound theorist and philosopher of culture on a par with such domestic thinkers as A.F. Losev, M.M. Bakhtin, or foreign ones like O. Spengler, A. Toynbee, K. Levi-Strauss, R. Barth or U. Eco.
In: Filozofski vestnik: FV, Band 22, Heft 2, S. 87-110
ISSN: 0353-4510
This essay takes the challenges posed by a definition of the baroque as model for thinking about the ways in which problems in aesthetic history can shape a philosophy of culture. Attempts to define the baroque as a period within art history have led to an astounding degree of confusion. The search for unifying stylistic markers amid this confusion has led critics to seek deep structures, while historical analyses of the deep structures fail to sustain their connections to style or form. Using the baroque as a model, this essay looks at examples from the visual arts & architecture in order to demonstrate the ways in which deep-structure theories of culture falter by presupposing a more rigid distinction between surface & depth than may be the case. Drawing in part on Deleuze's notion of the fold, this essay proposes that we look at culture as driven by forces that are both materialized in surfaces that are themselves part of any "deep structure.". 10 Figures, 39 References. Adapted from the source document.
In: Telos: critical theory of the contemporary, Band 1994, Heft 101, S. 83-91
ISSN: 1940-459X
In: Studies in East European thought, Band 46, Heft 3, S. 197
ISSN: 0925-9392
In: Science & society: a journal of Marxist thought and analysis, Band 74, Heft 1, S. 141-143
ISSN: 0036-8237
In: Studies in East European thought, Band 46, Heft 3, S. 197-222
ISSN: 1573-0948
In: Telos: critical theory of the contemporary, Band 1977, Heft 31, S. 202-220
ISSN: 1940-459X
In: Thesis eleven: critical theory and historical sociology, Band 160, Heft 1, S. 73-83
ISSN: 1461-7455, 0725-5136
As Professor of Philosophy at the University of Sydney for over 20 years (1978–2001), György Márkus exerted a profound influence on a generation of philosophers and students from many disciplinary backgrounds. His legendary lecture courses, spanning the history of modern philosophy from the Enlightenment through to the late 20th century, were memorable for their breadth, erudition, and philosophical drama. Always modest despite his mastery of the tradition, Márkus's approach to this history of philosophy never failed to emphasize its continuing role in shaping our inherited understanding of philosophy as 'its own time comprehended in thoughts' (Hegel). This is especially true of his contribution to the philosophical discourse of modernity, which we could summarize as comprising an original philosophy of cultural modernity. In what follows, I briefly reconstruct Márkus's account of the adventures of the concept of culture, focusing on his definitive essay 'The Path of Culture: From the Refined to the High, From the Popular to Mass Culture' (2013) but also referring to other relevant Márkus texts, offering some critical remarks on his account of culture and its relationship with modern aesthetics, both classical and contemporary.
In: Palgrave Communications, Band 4, Heft 1, S. 72-72
SSRN
In: Social research: an international quarterly, Band 64, Heft 2, S. 281
ISSN: 0037-783X
In: Politologija, Band 100, Heft 4, S. 8-33
ISSN: 2424-6034
The philosophy of culture put forward by Šalkauskis is a version of political philosophy. By using a typology of the relationship between philosophy and democracy we attempt to prove that his philosophy of culture encompasses not one but few different understandings of the relationship between democracy and philosophy. By comparing the ideas of Šalkauskis with the issues of contemporary political philosophy we can see that democracy today is developing by distancing itself from the principles that Šalkauskis presented in his philosophy of culture. The philosophy of culture as developed by Šalkauskis has two distinctive features. First of all, Christianity is interpreted through the matrix of culture and this is why it becomes compatible with democracy. Secondly, philosophy of culture is consciously transformed into ideology and this transformation is what allowed it to become an important factor in political discussions.
In: International social science journal: ISSJ, Band 38, Heft 3, S. 471-474
ISSN: 0020-8701
A philosophical analysis of the role of the ideal in a society's culture, with focus on Immanual Kant's & G. W. F. Hegel's views on the association of the ideal with contradiction & ways by which its attainment is predicated on the resolution of contradictions. Every ideal is characterized by three elements: (1) an appropriate form of consciousness in which it exists & manifests itself, (2) a certain stage in the development of social life that forms its basic objective reality, & (3) purposeful human activity. The cultural ideal is argued to be the inner image, objective requirement, social incentive, & aim of the activity of social man, & is responsible for balancing SE, political, moral, ethical, artistic, philosophic, & other values generated by social development. 1 Reference. K. Hyatt