Leopold的大地美學：〈美感的保育〉之實踐理論; Leopold’s land esthetic: the theory and practice of conservation esthetic

NCUIR > College of Liberal Arts at National Central University > Graduate Institute of Philosophy > Electronic Thesis & Dissertation > Item 987654321/43659

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/43659

Title:	Leopold的大地美學：〈美感的保育〉之實踐理論;Leopold’s land esthetic: the theory and practice of conservation esthetic
Authors:	吳妙音;Miau-Yin Wu
Contributors:	哲學研究所
Keywords:	環境美學;環境倫理;生態美感鑑賞／欣賞;突現美學;environmental ethics;Environmental Aesthetics;emergence aesthetics;appreciation of ecological sense of beauty
Date:	2010-07-16
Issue Date:	2010-12-08 14:06:50 (UTC+8)
Publisher:	國立中央大學
Abstract:	當代環境美學其處理之課題是針對傳統西方美學之忽視提出應如何鑑賞／欣賞自然環境與擴大日常生活審美考察與環境之間互動問題。本論文從兩位學者Allen Carlson「肯定美學」與Arnold Berleant「嚙合美學」所各自表述如何審美鑑賞／欣賞自然環境。Berleant的「嚙合美學」有三項主張，一、拒絕傳統藝術鑑賞模式運用在自然環境上，主體應當全身心地與自然環境嚙合以取代距（殊）離；二、突破傳統美學為中心的限制，走向生活環境美學的普適性；三、對人們自身其中的環境審美價值發展環境批評。Carlson的「肯定美學」則主張自然必須透過科學知識觀點正確地欣賞。兩位學者各自強調人與自然環境間互動或者是科學作為中介的適當自然欣賞。這些立場，僅是轉變西方傳統自然美學而擴充為當代環境美學觀。最重要的是，在揭露某種深邃的環境美學發展中，採取美感評價／評議環境向度之產生與環境倫理發生關連性的難題，兩位學者面對環境保護的深遠影響問題並沒有再深入說明其涵義。本文以Leopold的「大地美學」之主張填入，補其不足並重構大地美學。以Leopold之自然保育文章中，不時伴隨片段式的美學思想與美感經驗來看，並加上《沙郡年記》最後的第四章表達〈保育美學〉觀點。試圖推想，這些美感經驗或美學活動，它的激勵是倫理自動體現的，這些皆可由人自身體驗，因此，我以學者蕭振邦之「突現美學」觀點以形成大地美學之現代詮釋。 At present, owing to the ignorance of traditional Western aesthetics, the aims of contemporary Environmental Aesthetics are to present the issue of how to appreciate natural environment and to elucidate the interaction between the investigation and appreciation of the beauty and the environment. My thesis starts from two perspectives, Positive aesthetics by Allen Carlson and Aesthetics of Engagement by Arnold Berleant, which respectively offer their visions of how to appreciate natural environment. Berleant’s Aesthetics of Engagement consists of three ideas. First, with the refusal of the application of traditional artistic appreciation mode upon natural environment, the subject should be engaged in natural environment both physically and mentally instead of distance/alienation. The second one is to break through the limitation centered on traditional aesthetics and develop the universality of real life environmental aesthetics. The last one is to develop environmental criticism against the environmental beauty-appreciation value in which people are situated. Carlson’s Positive aesthetics maintains that nature be aesthetically appreciated with a proper manner from the viewpoint of scientific information. The two scholars individually emphasize the interaction between human and nature or decent appreciation of nature with the aid of science as connections. These grounds simply transform traditional Western natural aesthetics into contemporary environmental aesthetics. Most importantly, they unveil a certain profound evolution of environmental aesthetics and adopt the assessment of sense of beauty, which consequently gives rise to a dilemma highly related with environmental ethics. The two scholars didn’t further elucidate the implications of environmental protection, which can be immensely influential. With Leopold’s land esthetic, my thesis will continue the discussion in an attempt to replenish the unsaid part and reconstruct land esthetic. The articles on conservation by Leopold are tinged with fragmental aesthetic thinking and beauty experience. Besides, the fourth chapter, also the ending chapter, of A Sand County Almanac , and Sketches Here and There indicates the point of conservation esthetic. We may presume that the motivation of these beauty experience or aesthetic activities is naturally embodied through ethics. All these can be experienced by human themselves. Therefore, I am going to use emergence aesthetics by the scholar, Shiau Jenn-Bang, to construct a modern interpretation of land esthetic.
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Philosophy] Electronic Thesis & Dissertation

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	1211	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...