Sorted by date | |||
page063from Building IdeasAs part of this rationalizing process, the beautiful was defined in terms of intelligible, with drama dismissed as irrational and even dangerous for “susceptible souls”. The limits of this “traditional” philosophy were Nietzsche’s real and abiding interest, and in this he echoed the Romantics before him, as well as anticipating many more recent debates. He was against the idea that science expressed the truth about an “objective” world and he made a claim for the continued importance of the artist, when he questioned the very limits of logic itself:
Might there be a realm of wisdom from which the logician is excluded? Might art even be a necessary correlative and supplement to science?14 Aesthetics and Deconstruction – From Heidegger to Derrida This notion of the limits of science resurfaces again in the twentieth century, in a debate on the status of art which is still influential in philosophy today. The main protagonists in this debate are, again, two German philosophers, Martin Heidegger and Ernst Cassirer, who represent two distinct traditions. Both philosophers wrote on the subject of art as a form of knowledge, but their conclusions on the relationship between art and philosophy differed widely. Heidegger’s work has proved to be the more influential, due in part to its breadth and scope, as he set out to develop a new grounding for ontology – or philosophy of being – and, like Nietzsche, he tried to deconstruct its long-held traditions. He attempted to see beyond the limitations of language by examining other forms of expression. His writings on poetry, technology and art suggest they all have a significant function: by revealing the presence of truth in the world, they provide an insight into the mystery of “Being”. This Being is the great theme running throughout 14 Friedrich Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy, translated by Shaun Whiteside, Penguin Books, London, 1993, p 71
|
|||
|
|||
|