Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science) ›› 2020, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (2): 1-9.DOI: 10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2020.02.001
• Scientific and Technological Philosophy • Next Articles
WU Guo-lin, LIU Xiao-qing
Received:
Revised:
Online:
Published:
Contact:
About author:
Supported by:
-
Abstract:
Intentions, elements, structures, functions and environment constitute the systematic model of technological artifacts in the common sense. In order to make technological artifacts become works of art, the boundary factor should be taken into account, which interacts with the above five factors. Accordingly, the boundary factor and the other five factors constitute the ontological model of technological artifacts as works of art. The forms of technological artifact are not just boundaries or structures, but the overall manifestation of boundaries, structures, functions and elements. Equipped with aesthetic consciousness and combined with other factors, intentions make it possible for technological artifacts to be “aesthetic”. The unification of functions and aesthetics enables technological artifacts to be of symbolic aesthetic significance. With the improvement of modern technologies, technology and art undergo the transformation from separation to integration. As a product of deep integration, technological artifacts become art, which echoes well the meaning of the title.
Key words: technological artifact, works of art, aesthetic consciousness, form, symbol, function
CLC Number:
N031
WU Guo-lin, LIU Xiao-qing. How Could Technological Artifacts Be Works of Art?[J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2020, 22(2): 1-9.
0 / / Recommend
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://xuebao.neu.edu.cn/social/EN/10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2020.02.001
http://xuebao.neu.edu.cn/social/EN/Y2020/V22/I2/1
[1]瓦迪斯瓦夫·塔塔尔凯维奇. 西方六大美学观念史[M]. 刘文潭,译. 上海:上海译文出版社, 2013:66-67. [2]弗里德里希·黑格尔. 美学[M]. 寇鹏程,译. 重庆:重庆出版社, 2016:31. [3]阿多诺. 美学理论[M]. 王柯平,译. 成都:四川人民出版社, 1988:157-188. [4]凌继尧,徐恒醇. 西方美学史(第1卷)[M]. 北京:中国社会科学出版社, 2005. [5]蒋孔阳. 德国古典哲学[M]. 上海:商务印书馆: 2014:273. [6]赫伯特·里德. 工业艺术的历史与理论[M]∥技术美学与工业设计丛刊(第1辑). 天津:南开大学出版社, 1986:222. [7]Levinson J. Artworks as Artifacts[J]. American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy & Computers, 2007(2):27-38. [8]陈嘉映. 海德格尔哲学概论[M]. 北京:商务印书馆, 2016:231. [9]海德格尔. 艺术作品的起源[M]∥海德格尔选集(上). 孙周兴,译. 上海:上海三联书店, 1996:240. [10]Baker L R. The Ontology of Artifacts[J]. Philosophical Explorations, 2004,7(2):99-111. [11]Kroes P. Engineering and the Dual Nature of Technical Artefacts[J]. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2010,34(1):51-62. [12]吴国林. 论技术人工物的结构描述与功能描述的推理关系[J]. 哲学研究, 2016(1):113-120. [13]吴国林. 论分析技术哲学的可能进路[J]. 中国社会科学, 2016(10):29-51. [14]Jackendoff R. Parts and Boundaries[J]. Cognition, 1991,41(1/2/3):9. [15]Francastel P. Technics and Aesthetics[J]. Journal of Aesthetics & Art Criticism, 1953,11(3):187-197. [16]翟笛. 测宾利飞驰W12,10平米木材与600件工艺品[EB/OL]. (2016-01-09)[2019-07-10]. http:∥car.bitauto.com/feichi/pingce/. [17]刘易斯·芒福德. 对机器的审美改造[M]∥技术美学与工业设计丛刊(第1辑). 天津: 南开大学出版社, 1986:38-44.(下转第119页)