The main purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the relevance of the aesthetic understanding of the Western culture’s development in Nietzsche’s thought based on his artistic conception of interpretation.In order t...The main purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the relevance of the aesthetic understanding of the Western culture’s development in Nietzsche’s thought based on his artistic conception of interpretation.In order to accomplish this,his considerations on the figure of Homer in the production of the classical imaginary of Greek culture are taken as a discursive motif in the comparison between three distinct nuclei of his oeuvres,namely,his methodological discussions on philology,his theoretical analyses on the rhetorical nature of language-both from the time of his academic activity in Basel-and his philosophical reflections on creative interpretation in the 1880s.The fundamental premises raised by such comparison are the following:(a)interpretation as an art is a consequence of language as a pragmatically produced system of references;and(b)language is a practical aspect of the individual’s synthetic organic condition as a body in the world.As such,interpretation would be an aesthetic synthesis in Nietzsche’s philosophy.As a concluding remark,it should be demonstrated how the interpreter conceived as a creator is as worthwhile for understanding the historical processes of cultural transmission as it is for launching prospects for the future of cultural horizons.展开更多
文摘The main purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the relevance of the aesthetic understanding of the Western culture’s development in Nietzsche’s thought based on his artistic conception of interpretation.In order to accomplish this,his considerations on the figure of Homer in the production of the classical imaginary of Greek culture are taken as a discursive motif in the comparison between three distinct nuclei of his oeuvres,namely,his methodological discussions on philology,his theoretical analyses on the rhetorical nature of language-both from the time of his academic activity in Basel-and his philosophical reflections on creative interpretation in the 1880s.The fundamental premises raised by such comparison are the following:(a)interpretation as an art is a consequence of language as a pragmatically produced system of references;and(b)language is a practical aspect of the individual’s synthetic organic condition as a body in the world.As such,interpretation would be an aesthetic synthesis in Nietzsche’s philosophy.As a concluding remark,it should be demonstrated how the interpreter conceived as a creator is as worthwhile for understanding the historical processes of cultural transmission as it is for launching prospects for the future of cultural horizons.
