ديگريِ لويناس وجه انضمامي هنر نوپديد

Plato’s Historical Conception of Ancestors and its Relation to Etymology

تأكيد بر روي محتوا در هنر نوپديد باعث گرديده تا تفكر غالب بر روي اين آثار را بتوان با رويكردي بر فلسفه اخلاق مرور كرد. در ارتباط هنر و اخلاق پيوندهاي پيچيده و چندگانه اي برقرار است كه مي توان با تكيه بر آراي فيلسوفان و نظريه پردازان بالاخص معاصر، به زيبايي شناسي معاصر و ارتباط هنر با زندگي امروز انسان ها دست يافت. در اين مقاله، كوشيده خواهد شد تا با تكيه بر تفكرات و آراي لويناس در باب فلسفه اخلاق هنر نو پديد بررسي شود. لويناس مواجهه با ديگري را نوعي پديدارشناسي غيريت بيان مي دارد و اين پديدار را دال بر پايان قهرماني سوژه برمي شمرد. اخلاق لويناس به يك اعتبار، ناظر به تجربه اي است كه سوژه در مرحله اي از تكوين خويش با عالم (ديگري) از سر مي گاراند و هنر نوپديد نيز با وفاداري به اين وجه انضمامي از "ديگري" سعي در تحولي اساسي در رويكرد سوژه مدرن دارد.

Plato’s different and somehow contradictory views on etymology has long resulted in debates. In Cratylus and some other works he criticized etymology as a philosophical method. He denied any resemblance between things and their names so that the analysis of a name would not discover the essence of the thing. Yet he has practiced in his other works some etymological analyses which seems to be in opposition with his previous view and therefore there has been the debate if Plato at all believed in etymology as a philosophical method. Cratylus is generally believed as one of the so-called middle dialogues, i.e. those Plato wrote in the second phase of his philosophical career, while the aforementioned etymologies appear in the late dialogues. It shows that after Cratylus Plato in his late dialogues has changed his mind regarding etymology and its epistemological worth and subsequently inclined/tended to it. Plato disagrees etymology in Cratylus since he thinks the greek name-givers have failed to gain the truth about things so that the names they made do not correspond to the things themselves. The name-givers, called usually as law-givers by Plato, are the same ancestors who have founded/stablished the greek laws, norms, traditions and the opinions. In Cratylus Plato is suspicious to the knowledge of greek ancestors and his disagree with etymology is one of its consequences. However, in his later works because of some unknown reasons he changes his previous view and praised the ancestors’ virtues and confirmed their superior knowledge. Simultaneous with the change, and opposed to what we find in Cratylus, in later dialogues it is said that the greek names in all aspects correspond to the objects and this seems to be, according to Plato, due to name-giver’s knowledge of the things. Thus the reason why Plato has asserted different views on etymology seems to be that he has changed his view regarding the ancestors. In this article the passages with the subject names, namegivers and ancestors will be collected and analyzed.