Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Collingwood and Greek Aesthetics

Collingwood and Greek Aesthetics 135 Collingwood and Greek Aesthetics STANLEY H. ROSEN G. COLLINGWOOD, writing in The Principles of Art, has given us an interpretation of Greek aesthetics that is worth examining in some detail.I This is true for at least two reasons. In the first place, Collingwood's work, as in most of his books, is original and provocative, and it should be more widely studied by those who are interested in the philosophy of art. In the second place, it is wrong, which, when combined with the ingenuity just mentioned, makes it perhaps more worthy of inspection than many saner accounts. I hope that this judgment does not seem perverse; it is nothing other than a reformulation of the old platitude that we often learn more from those whose views we reject than from those with whom we agree. I am forced to reject Collingwood's picture of the views of Plato and Aris- totle almost in their entirety, yet I believe that I have learned a good bit about Plato and Aristotle in doing so; if this is so, it is only a sign of the truth which lies in platitudes, and not of any scorn for Collingwood. In the discussion http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Phronesis Brill

Collingwood and Greek Aesthetics

Phronesis , Volume 4 (2): 135 – Jan 1, 1959

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/collingwood-and-greek-aesthetics-ndIgC9f5jo

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 1959 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0031-8868
eISSN
1568-5284
DOI
10.1163/156852859X00155
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

135 Collingwood and Greek Aesthetics STANLEY H. ROSEN G. COLLINGWOOD, writing in The Principles of Art, has given us an interpretation of Greek aesthetics that is worth examining in some detail.I This is true for at least two reasons. In the first place, Collingwood's work, as in most of his books, is original and provocative, and it should be more widely studied by those who are interested in the philosophy of art. In the second place, it is wrong, which, when combined with the ingenuity just mentioned, makes it perhaps more worthy of inspection than many saner accounts. I hope that this judgment does not seem perverse; it is nothing other than a reformulation of the old platitude that we often learn more from those whose views we reject than from those with whom we agree. I am forced to reject Collingwood's picture of the views of Plato and Aris- totle almost in their entirety, yet I believe that I have learned a good bit about Plato and Aristotle in doing so; if this is so, it is only a sign of the truth which lies in platitudes, and not of any scorn for Collingwood. In the discussion

Journal

PhronesisBrill

Published: Jan 1, 1959

There are no references for this article.