Aesthetics and philosophy

German philosopher martin heidegger has a decisive influence on phenomenology, existentialism, deconstruction, hermeneutics, postmodernism, political theory, psychology and theology.

He has too many works, hehe. His works are regarded as existentialism.

Heidegger deconstructs the history of western philosophy from the perspective of existence, and thinks that human history is the history in which the truth of existence (Tao, origin and existence) is forgotten-Heidegger thinks that "logos" is the origin of the world. So it is very similar to the philosophical core of China and Laozi. Timeliness is the way of human existence. The world is the unity of metaphysics and metaphysics, and the sum of all relations and meanings. Heidegger learned from Husserl's phenomenology (Husserl's observation) that any intentional activity can only operate in a certain horizon or marginal domain. For example, when our perceptual intuition wants to "see" a blank piece of paper on the table, we must have seen the environment around the paper and various objects inside, such as desks and pens. Another example is Russell's theory of descriptions. In fact, its essence is the interdependence of things caused by the lack of things-there is nothing else, how can there be this thing? Similarly, the choice of reference frame in general relativity and the complex system in chaos theory can also be taken as examples. Husserl, on the other hand, expanded his vision to our whole life world, further pushed it to the vision of life world-existence and nothingness-and got inspiration from Laozi and Zhuangzi in the East, asking about existence (nothingness and Tao) and writing about existence and time. The finiteness and timeliness of human beings are planning the future and marching towards death. The existence (Tao) that makes things become things (existence is not equal to existence) is nothingness, and nothingness is existence, which is called "clarity", "openness" and "no cover". The development of the West is a history in which existence and truth are forgotten.

"Truth" = existence = avenue. People constantly "plan" and "worry" in the world. Language is Tao, and language is Tao (with a mythical tendency towards language).

Due to Heidegger's unfinished < < Existence and Time > >; & gt Too much pen and ink is used to discuss the so-called basic noumenon of human existence, so as to reach the avenue as a starting point, instead of directly controlling everything by entering the Tao first and then returning to the world, which makes this book pretend to be the master and ignores the existence of this achievement here. It seems too human to forget the suspicion of existence. Therefore, it is wise for Heidegger to abandon the book Being and Time on the road of truth. Therefore, Heidegger's method entry point was improved in the later period. This change also makes Heidegger's philosophy completely metaphysical, which leads to many people's understanding of Heidegger in the fog. )

Heidegger thought that human's task was to listen to the call of existence, so he turned to poetry and other arts in his later period. He believes that as long as anyone's design and thoughts can't improve the status quo, people's thoughts are limited, and he can't master all the secrets of showing himself and hiding his existence at the same time.

The works and opinions of the shoes you mentioned are attached as follows:

As for Van Gogh's "Peasant Shoes", the secret of those famous paragraphs lies in two or three irrelevant transitional sentences at the beginning and end of those paragraphs-and the whole "Peasant Shoes" may be about transition and escorting. Through this pair of agricultural shoes, Heidegger answered the question he raised before mentioning shoes: "However, which way leads to the appliance factor of the appliance?" The answer is: a road with shoes.

However, the Tao of this reason is so inconspicuous-"This thought uses its Tao to plow inconspicuous furrows in language, which are even more inconspicuous than those plowed by farmers slowly in the fields."

The first inconspicuous wrinkle: This is the first sentence to introduce agricultural shoes: "For example, we choose a common appliance: a pair of agricultural shoes." Just an example? Just a random choice? Just because shoes are an ordinary appliance? Here, the road is moving quietly, the shoes are approaching quietly, the storm of thoughts and elements is about to sweep, the world and the earth are about to be suddenly enlightened, and the tedious discussion about the physical properties of things and the instrumentality and usefulness of utensils is about to be swept away, beginning to show their indicative relationship with the road.

The second inconspicuous groove: These are the words before the transition to Van Gogh: "In order to describe it (referring to shoes), we don't even need to show the real object of such an instrument. Everybody knows that. However, because a direct description is involved here, it is best to provide some convenience for intuitive understanding. " -Just convenient? Yes, it's convenient. It's also an entrance. Chinese means "easy to practice". (original erleichtern, relax, relax, so you can enter. So, then, "for this kind of help, an image display is enough. To this end, we chose a famous oil painting by Van Gogh. " In this way, Van Gogh was introduced into Heidegger's ideological world from an obscure way, which was opened up by his painting of farm shoes.

The third unremarkable ditch mark: This is a pretentious and ignorant question about the road transportation that has quietly happened when we return to the question of "material factors" and "work factors" after talking about Van Gogh's farm shoes: "But we are still at a loss about what we first explored, that is, material factors. Especially for our real and only purpose of exploration, that is, the working factors of works in the sense of works of art, we know nothing. " Start another paragraph, "or, did we inadvertently, incidentally, have a fragmentary experience of the existence of the work?" However, even the slowest reader has found that we have been led a way through Van Gogh-Heidegger's farm shoes, opening up a world with completely different physical properties from the first three historical forms. This world is a world of scenery, which develops into a free world around like the wind, while human beings are bathed in the wind of the elements of things. In this relationship between people and things, the physical essence of things is no longer "raped" and thoughts are no longer "involved in this rape".

But the above three inconspicuous gullies and ridges add up, which are not comparable to the mysterious nature of this road opened by agricultural shoes. This kind of nature comes from the simple fact that the road is above Yuan Ye, while the agricultural shoes walk on "endless monotonous fields", "land that calls silently", "land that quietly presents grain" and "land that hibernates in the barren fields in winter". The vigorous movement of the road is constantly carried by the thickness and locking of the earth. The roadbed of the road, if it is strong enough, must be stone, or at least hard soil. The stone under the road indicates the coming Greek temple in the next section "Works and Truth". In the later reconciliation, we will develop the ethical world of historical nation between the road (farm shoes) and the stone (temple), and the ethical connection between Bauernschuhe (farm shoes) and Bauwerk (architecture) is not unrelated to bin. (See Architecture, Life and Thinking). But before entering the section of "Works and Truth" and Greek temples, we must first clarify the fountain in Rome. At the end of the section of "Things and Works", we almost quote the poem itself without any explanation. Heidegger almost never liked Rome, its fountains. This fountain is even less obvious than farm shoes and their roads, and it is mentioned as a pure transition. This least noticeable example may just be the central secret of the whole article. If our relief claims to be a smooth road or a smooth road, then the negligence of this secret passage is intolerable.

2. About jacques derrida.

Jacques derrida (1July 930 15) was a famous French philosopher and a representative of deconstruction.

Derrida's fame is closely related to his deconstruction philosophy, which is also called "post-philosophy" and has a strong challenge and digestion effect on traditional rational philosophy. Due to the penetrating power of Derrida's post-philosophy, the boundary between philosophy and literature was actually cleared up, and the "end of philosophy" and "liberation of literature" were accelerated, which laid the foundation for the birth of a new humanities.

Although Derrida has repeatedly argued that deconstruction is not a theory, or even an anti-theoretical strategy to some extent, its result has provided an important theoretical basis for the deconstruction criticism that once swept the United States. It can even be said that Derrida is the originator and leader of deconstruction theory and even the whole post-structuralism/post-modernism theoretical trend of thought.

Although Derrida never abused the critical terms of postmodernism or postcolonialism, Lyotard, Baudrillard, Hassan, Said, spivak and Baba, recognized masters of postmodernism or postcolonialism, were all influenced by his thoughts. Even Marxist theorists like Habermas and Jameson have not been spared his influence. Of course, Derrida also became interested in Marxism in the later period, and was inspired and influenced by the latter.

When we examine Derrida's contribution from the perspective of literary theory, we must start with language, which is an important factor in composing literary texts. The influence of Derrida's theory on the theory of literary criticism lies in that he always pays attention to language issues and was once infatuated with Saussure's structuralist linguistics and Levi-Strauss's structuralist criticism. And it is here that his deconstruction attempt began.

He opposes structuralism's one-sided view of language, which appeals to a single structure, and thinks that words have multiple levels and meanings, so the interpretation of literary texts composed of language words should be diversified. Obviously, this view strongly challenges the view that language is a form of direct communication, and at the same time refutes the view that the author of the text is the master of meaning. Therefore, with the unremitting efforts and exploration of deconstructionists led by Derrida, written language has got rid of the shackles of language structure, thus paving the way for multiple interpretations of meaning.

As a prolific critic of creative theory, Derrida opposed the tradition of scholasticism, but positioned his work between philosophy and literature, or a literary philosophical work, which was in the same strain as Nietzsche's tradition. He wrote a lot in his life. Almost all his works, once published, quickly entered the English-speaking world, which had a great influence on the critical theory circle in North America. However, Derrida's philosophical thought has already gone beyond the traditional philosophical category, integrated anthropology, linguistics and psychoanalysis, and formed a broader critical theory, so his position in scholasticism has been questioned.

It is generally believed that his works are very difficult to read, and even reading spivak's English version or Keller's explanatory works is often confusing. I should point out here that Derrida is very lucky compared with many of his contemporaries. His influence in English academic circles is mainly attributed to three American critics: Gayatri C. spivak of Gayatri spivak, jonathan kalle of jonathan kalle and J. Hillis Miller of hillis.

Among the three American scholars, spivak's contribution is mainly reflected in the accurate translation of Derrida's early masterpiece "On Literature" into English, and systematically explained Derrida's difficult deconstruction thought in more than 80 pages of the translator's preface, which laid the foundation for its popularization in American criticism; Culler's On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism is the clearest book to comprehensively explain Derrida's early theory. Miller's contribution is mainly reflected in the timely concretization of Derrida's academic thoughts and theoretical achievements in various periods in literary criticism and reading. It is conceivable that without the criticism and explanation of the above three American scholars, Derrida's abstruse theories and difficult works would have been idle on the bookshelves of scholars until now.

As a critical theoretical trend of thought, deconstruction was challenged by neo-historicism and post-colonialism as early as the late 1980s, and relegated to a secondary position, but Derrida's own deconstruction attempt continued. We can see that Marxism and post-structuralism are equally important in the new historicism criticism theory, and we can also see the obvious traces of Derrida's deconstruction thought from the works of post-colonial criticism theorist spivak.

Derrida's thought has always been controversial. Because his thought is incompatible with the mainstream analytical philosophy of Anglo-American philosophy, it has never been valued by the American philosophy department. His thought has a wide influence and is used as a theoretical weapon for feminist movement, gay struggle and black movement. His ideas are not accepted by many traditional scholars, who think that he destroyed western civilization. After his death, French President Jacques Chirac said in a statement: "Because of him, France has passed on one of the greatest contemporary philosophical thoughts to the world, and he is a well-deserved' world citizen'."

3. About Walter Benjamin

Walter. Benjamin 1936 "October" article "Photography in Mechanical Reproduction"

Editors have great influence. According to Benjamin, modernity is characterized by two major developments: 1. The rise of mass society; 2. technological revolution,

I.e. optical mechanical reproduction. These two developments will greatly affect the concept of art. He believes that artists are regarded as a person with

The ideas of geniuses who create unparalleled works of art are out of date; About originality, genius, eternal value and God

The idea of secrets is also out of date. For example, copying the Mona Lisa did not weaken the aura of the original, on the contrary, they made it bigger.

People want to see the original style. The copy did not make the original lose its value, but enhanced its aura. Therefore,

The more copies, the stronger the gas field. Benjamin extended the idea of reproduction to photography. He thinks, because photos can

Mechanical reproduction, no photo can be considered original, unique or credible. Benjamin became

Idol worshipped by October magazine editors. The reason why he attracts them is that he concentrates on photography, which is

Therefore, mechanical reproduction art is a suitable medium for contemporary culture. It replaced oil painting, which Benjamin thought was an asset.

Things in class. Benjamin was the first person to criticize modernism from the perspective of sociology, and he linked photography with artistic reform.

Up, provides the theory of mechanical replication. Mechanical reproduction liberates art from tradition and puts it in "politics"

Governance field. Art can be a weapon to serve communism. Photography can accomplish this task because it can be widely used.

Easy and cheap to spread among the public. Benjamin thinks that movies are more powerful propaganda weapons than still photography.