艺术学“学科正当性”的三种证明方式及其方法论反思

Three Ways of Proving“Discipline Legitimacy”of Art Studies and the Reflection on Its Methodology

近年来,艺术学界对艺术学学科提出了各种各样的质疑和争议,但归结起来可以概括为关于艺术学“学科正当性”的争辩。以往关于艺术学“正当性”的主要证明方式大致有三种:一是以理性逻辑为学理依据的“学科逻辑主义”确证方式;二是以知识权力为功利诉求的“学科功利主义”确证方式;三是以人文精神为价值诉求的“学科人文主义”确证方式。显然,这三种确证方式都有其自身存在的“合理合法性”,但同时也呈现出各自的不足,因而有待于我们从哲学方法论维度反思批判艺术学学科建制的现代性问题,为探寻艺术学学科建设发展的崭新路径,提供人文社会科学方法论意义上的思想资源与学理支撑。

For many years,the art academic circles have been discussing the establishment,adjustment and construction of art discipline,among which there are many questions and controversies.This phenomenon is rare in the traditional disciplines,and therefore,it is worthy of our reflection.Although there are all kinds of questions and controversies on art discipline in the art circle,they can be summed up as:the debate on the legitimacy of art discipline.Generally speaking,there are three main ways of proving“legitimacy”in art studies:“disciplinary logicism”based on rational logic,“disciplinary utilitarianism”with knowledge power as the utilitarian appeal,and“disciplinary humanism”with humanistic spirit as the value appeal.Obviously,these three ways of proving all have their own“reasonable legitimacy”,but they also present their own shortcomings and deficiencies.Therefore,we need to reflect and criticize the modernity of art discipline establishment from the perspective of methodology,in order to explore a new path for the development of art discipline,and to provide ideological resources and theoretical support for the methodology of art discipline and for the development of humanities and social science.