The focus here will be on the tension between architecture’s symbolic role and its function as a space to house and present art. ‘Symbolic’ refers both to a building as an aesthetic or sculptural form and secondly to its role in expressing civic identity. ‘Function’ refers to the intended purpose or practical use apart from its role as a form of art. As an art form, it serves important symbolic purposes; its practical purposes are linked to serving individual and community functions requiring the delineation of space. In the present context of museum architecture, certain museum buildings are more likely to be seen as a sculptural object than as functioning buildings. The reasons for this development derive in part from unresolved issues pertaining to the respective roles of symbolic and practicalfunction as is seen in the analysis of architecture provided by G. W. F. Hegel, Rudolf Arnheim and Nelson Goodman. The vocabularies of contemporary architects such Frank Gehry and Santiago Calatrava do not follow the abstract geometrical patterns of Le Corbusier or Louis Kahn who envisioned a universal vocabulary of architectural forms derived from industrial technical forms that underscored Modernist conventions in architecture.By looking at this issue in the contexts provided by the theoretical discussions of Hegel, Arnheim and Goodman, it is possible to see more clearly the importance of examining with a critical eye the relative place of symbolism and function in museum architecture, and to question whether current museum practice has gone astray in allowing the sculptural symbolism to become the dominant element. When either its symbolic or its practical aspects are out of balance the result is sure to be unsatisfactory architecture. If the past is a reliable guide, it works best when the symbolic (sculptural) and the practical in architecture are worked out in harmony with each other.

Dance is the gesture of life. In other words, dance is a moving gesture to attain life's aim. As people have will to accomplish their aim, the will of life is expressed in dancing. Dance comes, therefore, from the heart as it arises from the flow of mind. The visible dancing feature begins from invisible mind. While life is made of flesh and mind, dance is the gesture of life containing both. Culture is from people's life. As the ground of culture have people's personal and also collective history, it is the case in Chum (Korean traditional dance). No matter what region or folk is, every ethnical dance express its own condensed culture and heritage. In this respect, though each ethnical traditional dance can't be evaluated, Korean sees people as the small universe. Chum does not simply express ourbody. We conceived nature and human as one, as a whole that cannot be dividable. Based on that wisdom, Chum has expressed the holistic gesture of Korean and nature. As summary, Chum is the movement of nature and flow of mind of Korean, expressing our culture.

In this article the author examines the problem of mental experiment extrapolation to musical art. Thus an attempt was made to determine the community of mechanisms of thought process in the scientific cognition and in the artistic creation. Author talks about peculiarities of music mental experiment and emphasizes its basic functions in musical thought. Therefore, the mental experiment in the sphere of aesthetic activity has its own specific character, whichis not identical with the notion of the mental experiment in the scientific sphere and scientific experience. It shows the greatest importance of rethought the category of “mental experiment” in the musical creation sphere. The study of the mental experiment in the sphere of music, as one of the forms of non-verbal treatment, storage, creation and transfer of information, is of great value, meets the self-reflectiveness necessities of life of individual or the whole society.

In his study “On the Concept of Irony” Kierkegaard characterizes irony several times as pedagogue. This alludes to Galatians 3,24f., according to which the law has been a pedagogue (‘Zuchtmeister’ in the relevant German translation, Luther 1984) in relation to Christian faith, and alludes further to the three uses of thelaw in Protestantism. Presented on this background the pedagogue becomes an important figure for the interpretation of irony and its negative dialectics in philosophy, religion and art. Drawing attention to the pedagogue in the emphatic sense might be helpful for a reading of Kierkegaard’s writings (both the pseudonymic and the edifying works) as well as for a genealogy of negative dialectics with all its modern and contemporary actualizations, e.g. in Adorno’saesthetical theory or in Danto’s considerations concerning art and philosophy after Duchamp.

One of the important aspects of recent aesthetics is its focus on cross-disciplinary approaches. This implies that, although claims to generality and objectivity continue to be made, no single practice, science, or approach is able to provide absolute evidential support for arguments and claims. Aesthetics as a critical enterprise, therefore, is open to a plurality of explanations. As a result, art becomes more than another object of scientific or philosophical inquiry. It becomes a model for philosophical practice that can complement or compete with dominant scientific paradigms. However, such aesthetic practice must respond to at least two grounds for skepticism: that a turn to aesthetics involves withdrawal from either critical and rigorous thinking or from social action and life. By discussing three core themes relevant for recent debates across the fields of philosophy, art history/theory and art pratice we would like to show how these concerns, while serious, can be taken up by aesthetics. These themes are: 1. the issue of validity (motivated by inquiries into the peculiar validity of aesthetic judgments); 2. the issue of subjectivity (motivated by the stipulated ‘special link’ between aesthetics and the human subject); and the political dimension of aesthetics (highlighted by the political implications of pluralist approaches to aesthetics, such as the need for negotiation and appeal).

In this paper I will explore the philosophical modes of connectivity between ethics and aesthetics. I argue first, that the traditional ethical theories of deontology, consequentialism and virtue ethics can be mapped onto the aesthetic theories of formalism, functionalism and taste. Second, I argue that we can see threesimilar themes running through the literature that explicitly addresses the interdependence of ethics and aesthetics. Finally, I will outline this body of literature, which I shall call ‘aestheticoethical’ theory, using the three categories of essential, instrumental and existential connection. The philosophical landscape I amoutlined in this paper represents the groundwork for a larger pedagogical project. I argue that the traditional ethical theory is limited when it comes to teaching ethics to students going into creative industries like advertising. I propose that these three modes of aesthetico-ethical theory can be used to construct an alternative theoretical framework for teaching ethics at the intersection of creativity and commercial practice. Is philosophy relevant to everyday life? Is it not too abstract and general? The knowledge of priests, psychologists or physicians is as abstract and general, yet its relevance is not contested. Is not its relevance limited to the case of the rare sage which is both able to discuss complex philosophical matters and ready to adopt “the philosophical attitude” to life? Suchpopular notions ignore controversies with regard to the existence of such sages, the content of their alleged wisdom, or the nature or impact of their “philosophical attitude”. Modern philosophy is generally much more skeptical, realistic, pluralistic and therefore “democratic” than the elitist classics. It does not trust myths about the “good life” of the wise, nor ignore their preoccupation with death.

The Paleolithic art interpretation is still a polemical subject. Nearly 300 caves covered with Paleolithic paintings have been discovered and more than 90% are located in Spain and in France. Surprisingly, more than half the painted illustrations are abstract patterns such as dots and lines. The high realism of naturalist figures also stands out. We will present the four groups of theories that have been formulated since the end of the XIXth century in order to interpret the Paleolithic art: the artistic theory from Lartet and Piette; the magical hunting theory from anthropologists such as Tylor and Frazer and archeologists like Breuil; the structuralist theory from Raphael, Leroi- Gourhan and Laming-Emperaire; and lastly the shamanist theory from Lewis-Williams and Clottes. We will also refer to the agglutinative theory gathering all of these from Ucko and Rosefeld. Afterwards I will offer my own thought. Paleolithic paintings are the expression the life led by every generation of the clan. The panels or the set of animals as much as the painted signs are their own History collection.

The paper is based on the original study of Galina Kolomiets named «The conception of music value as a substance and as the way of value interaction between the person and the world» which is presented in the monograph “The music value: philosophical aspect”. The phenomenon of music is considered as the indissoluble unity of its two hypostases – the essence of music (musical substance) and musical skill, which belongs to the person and the world. The basicidea of the author is to show, how the extra-historical essence of music (world harmony, universal rhythm) is connected with the man and the world and what are “the cohesion mechanisms” of musical substance as a form of art. According to the study such mechanisms are: the music value and value in the music, inverted, from one side, to the highest sense, from another - to the senses of human life.

Media art can be conceived as laboratory, at the edges of art. These technological experiments give priority to innovation and exploration by means of new media. In metaphorical terms, we could say that the emphasis is on creating new languages that allow us, in a later phase, to write prose or poetry with it.In my paper, I discuss why the common view on media art falls short. Media art is not just about mixing media but rather about mixing art. Several different challenges are at stake that beget a hybrid post-medium condition. (1) The artistic practice of media art often concerns exercises in remediation (i.e. resonating visual narratives of old media in new media). Here, we encounter a repetition of historical themes and re-makes or re-enactments of classical art pieces. These experiments thus mix the history of art. (2) Media art is often also about immersion (i.e. interactively enclosing the spectactor in a audiovisual or virtual realm). In experiments with CAVE-installations or 3D-cinema using digital goggles, for instance, we notice a combination of an artistic interest with a phenomenologicaland a scientific one (cf. so-called postfenomenology, robotics, experimental psychology). Hence, these experiments mix art with science. (3) Media art is not just a friction between art an technoscience. It takes place at a junction between art, creative industry, design, sociology and politics. Concerning the latter, I willdiscuss the culture-critical potential of i.e. hacktivism, marx 2.0 and bio-performances like Stelarc and Orlan. (4) Media art is not simply a genre that aims for recognition as a part of or a completion of fine art. While democratizing new media technology, it actually blurs the idea of genre, altering and opening up the very canon of fine art, music art, live art, performance art, video art and cinema.

Copyright law is a crucial part of the normative framework of the artistic and art-related practices in the modern world. It facilitates the production and public accessibility of certain works of art and literature, music, moving images, etc. At the same time, it prevents the production and public accessibility of others whichmight have been just as interesting as those we got to know. Intellectual property norms imprint our ideas of authorship as well as the ontological constitution of artworks. Yet the interdependencies and interferences between copyright law, aesthetic theories and artistic practices deserve a more thorough analysis. This paper presents a new approach to an institutional theory of art, analyzing the relevance of intellectual property regimes for the opening and exclusion of certain possibilities in the production, distribution and use of works of art as well as for our understanding of some fundamental aesthetic concepts.

Our reality constitutes itself as being one of pictures. Landscape is a product of aesthetic reflection as well as the perception of reality and virtual reality of the first order (VR 1). Pictorial representation of a landscape is virtual reality of the second order (VR 2). A picture is a structure of relations with a specific topology or an interrelationship. A picture is set in relation. Topology relates to relational similarities and differences as well as their transfer into other interrelationships, other topologies. The differences between nature, landscape (VR 1), metaphor of landscape and pictorial representation of landscape, etc. (VR 2) describe a change of the interrelationship. These changes happen in a physical-psychic-mental production of reality. We are involved in the events of particular relationships of the picture. The Topology of Being and Appearance reflects the inconspicuous similarities of relations and proportions in the relationship of the world in association with our physical-psychic-mental existential orientation in the world.

I was more excited by Jacques Ranciere’s idea about aesthetics being, in his opinion, a special way of thinking (mode de pensee) that works of art provoke and that tends to show what they are like as art objects. Aesthetics then (following this intention) would not be viewed as a discipline akin to art theory that wouldexamine the structure of the work of art, its peculiarities, conditions of arising, et cetera, all that attests either to its objectivity or subjectivity. Ranciere underscores the special (in the style of Hegel and Romanticist philosophy) regime of thinking about art where the idea is not yet an idea, but is what is not yet being thought. In spite of the fact that Ranciere’s declarations refer to S. Freud’s theory of the unconscious that, in his opinion, is closely linked with the way of artistic thinking and possibly can be expressed in no other way but through the medium of artistic thinking. The same way refers to the basic concepts of Freud’s psychoanalysis including also the unconscious and the ideas on complexes, especially on the Oedipus complex. It is interesting that Ranciere compares the framework ofthe dramatic nature of Oedipus’ fate with the basic fluctuations of aesthetics and art and namely – just like Oedipus is also the one who experiences everything absolutely and is completely expressed in action so the character of aesthetics and art is hidden in the contradictions between activities and sufferings or action and passions. This theme just like the question of the extreme poles of understanding aesthetics – pleasure and pain is comparable with the question of the determination of aesthetics and also art that grasps human experience in figural bodily shapes because that is the way of discerning the thought that is not yet being thought, but is hidden in bodily or animated figures. This tradition or historical regime, I think, is not to be discovered as a rectilinear trajectory; it manifests itself in a contradictory and sporadic way, frequently as an interlude between crucial conclusions and an essential interest pointing towards the ambivalence of art that referring to the words of the early modernist poet Charles Baudelaire: “I am the wound and the knife” would mark these relationships between action and its effect that could also attest to the painful birth of the thought in the not thought yet or else the negative character of aistheton.

How is the painter’s body related to the process of making a beautiful brush stroke? Those interested in this question will benefit from Jianping Gao’s findings, in The Expressive Act in Chinese Painting, a book that presents the aesthetic ideas of Chinese literati painters and art critics. Gao’s assigns five features to the actual practice of painting that results in the making of brush strokes that literati audiences would call “naturally beautiful.” These five are the interaction of idea and body, the concentration on paper, the suspension of the perception of natural objects, the emergence of a “pure self”, and the intersection of self with nature. I begin with the practice of concentration on paper and find that the literati painter observes the whole of the visible paper. After that, I introduce Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s late writings on the flesh of the body that belongs to the working painter. By developing the idea of an innate, interior whole of visibility, which persists through fleeting perceptions and Gestalts, Merleau-Ponty offers us a way to describe the individual painter’s innate corporeality, the transformation of thepainter, and intimate contact with nature. With Merleau-Ponty’s term “flesh of the body,” I return to interpret the five features of the literati process of making naturally beautiful strokes. I conclude that the literati writings help to reshape present-day aesthetics, and I note the philosophical language for a non-physical corporeality helps us appreciate the ideas of Chinese literati painters.

In this paper, I argue that, first, there is a non-verbal metaphor, specifically pictorial metaphor, second, there are differences between verbal and non‐verbal metaphor but their differences are not as big as some people expect. Theorists who argue for visual/pictorial metaphor have used some analogy withverbal metaphor in order to justify their position. This approach itself is not wrong but sometimes their analogy goes to the wrong direction. I introduce two theorists, Noel Carroll and Richard Wollheim, who have a theory of visual metaphor and make an analogy with verbal metaphor. Their theories doom to fail because their analogy with verbal metaphor based on misunderstanding about verbal metaphor. Verbal metaphor is not to pair two objects belongs to unrelated realms, as pictorial metaphor is not recognize two different aspect alternatively, aspect seeing. Of course, paring two unrelated objects and aspect seeing may trigger off metaphor, but metaphor is not only about these two objects but also related to whole picture, sentence, discourse, or phrase and these things bringus to a pretense context in which metaphorical elements works and we are engaging in order to appreciate metaphor. When we see the metaphor in a whole picture, we enhance our understanding not only about visual metaphor but also verbal metaphor. Their differences lies in the way they get their primary meaning, but beyond it, there is no fundamental difference as metaphors between them.

Visual arts have undergone significant changes in their character, identities, structures, And perceptions of what it means to be an artist. Arts have been ‘dematerialized’, so to say. This, in turn, creates a dilemma’: on the one hand, art turns into philosophy or mere strategy of representation; on the other, art becomes anything, with its pluralistic, pragmatic and multicultural characters. Corollary to this is that now art can hardly be judged, and hence, art criticismdisappears. Today art bears the character of pop-products : traumatic, nostalgic, transgressive, and nomadic. In such a cultural plight, however, art is not without significance. While the exclusive ‘world of Art’ seems to dissolve, its significant relation with broader life is resolved.

Carroll denies that the spectator of fiction film commonly has empathy with the characters. He argues that the spectator typically emotes to the events in the film from his position as observer, and that this context gives asymmetrical reactions in spectator and character. According to Carroll, empathy is unlikely to occur. Theproblem with this argument is that if the differences between spectator and character that Carroll points to exclude empathy, it would also exclude empathy in real life. Furthermore, Carroll merely shows that the spectator cannot only feel as the character feels. This does however not entail that empathy cannot be one part of the spectator’s response as observer. This paper thus argues that Carroll fails to show that empathy is an unlikely spectator response.

Some philosophers identify the meaning of a work of art with what the artist intended the work to mean. Other philosophers think that although an artist’s intentions don’t fully determine a work’s meaning, they are a partial determinate of it. Last, there are philosophers who think that an artist’s intentions have no bearing on a work’s meaning. This paper is an examination of several arguments for the last of these three positions. In particular, it is a critical examination of three arguments advanced by Monroe Beardsley in his earlier writings in aesthetics.

Aesthetics is about sensations, experiences and emotions – but also about the rational mind that guides them. At the centre lies the feeling, sensing and thinking individual. The world unfolds from within oneself. No matter how remote a spot one chooses, it becomes the centre of the world; everyone travels with his own centre of the world, inevitably. He is, I am, the centrepoint.

Along 19th and 20th centuries, art became a sort of new religion, sometimes coexisting peacefully with the institutional one, sometimes trying to provide what the institutional religion was not able to provide any more. Nowadays, art has adopted many of the solutions, topics and theories that theology has handled since it was born. Arthur C. Danto treats art as a reality whose history is over (and so, a escathological reality) and also as a metaxological (metaxy=between) reality dwelling between two realms. Thus, we cannot decide by pure perceptive means whether something is art or not. This consideration has important consequences for art theory.

What might the project be of lyric poetry in late global capitalism in the early years of the new millennium which acknowledges both a post-romantic and modernist lineage, and which faces the critical challenge of postmodernist theorizing? This paper endeavors to respond to this question forwarding the Adorno-inspired viewpoint that the praxes of individual lyric poems reveal orientations of affirmation or negation be they intended or not. The thesis is stated that the “arguments” of modern poets are creative litigations posing counter-worlds, constituting anti-worlds, and projecting ideal worlds. The philosophical anthropology that informs this thesis focuses on the homo duplex conception of man as a double being—as a unique human individual and as members of thehuman species socialized into the social life-world. Thus a counterworld privileges the human subject in society as homo externus, whereas an anti-world centers on the human subject as homo internus opposed, at odds, or turned away from the external social life-world. These reflections finally concentrate on Northrop Frye’s idea of a “third order of experience” that, in his words, contrasts with “an existing world and a world which may not exist but is pointed toby the articulate orders of experience . . . this world is frequently called… an unborn world, a world that never quite enters existence.”