重审新时期实践美学、新实践美学与后实践美学之争

摘要

In the history of contemporary Chinese aesthetics,the debates among"practical aesthetics"," new-practical aesthetics"and"post-practical aesthetics"lasted for 30years approximately and mainly fell into two parts:the debate between"practical aesthetics"and"post-practical aesthetics", and that between "new-practical aesthetics"and "post-practical aesthetics"which influenced the pattern of Chinese aesthetics and its development directions.Through a historical review and theoretical introspection,it can be concluded that"new-practical aesthetics"and"post-practical aesthetics" not only inherited,criticized and remolded"practical aesthetics",while promoting its pluralistic development negatively or positively,but also broke the dominancy of"practical aesthetics"by taking advantage of modern Western philosophy and aesthetics.The complicated tripartite pattern of the Praxis School,the New-Praxis School,and the Post-Praxis School has been formed after the downfall of the"aesthetic craze".Meanwhile,the three schools could not overcome the obstacle of incompatibility concerning the basic concepts,nor could they avoid their theoretical defects and limitations. They had obvious controversies over the relationship between"modernity"and"Chineseness".These debates have the following enlightenments:we should get rid of the absolute thinking mode which puts China and the West,the classical and the modern,the old and the new on the opposite sides and gives priority to the latter.Modern Chinese aesthetics based on practical aesthetics relies on the stance of localization,the fusion of Chinese culture and Western culture,pluralistic existence,equal dialogue, practical attitude,and the integration of theory with practice.%在新时期中国美学史上,"实践美学""新实践美学"与"后实践美学"之间长达近30年的论争主要包括"实践美学与后实践美学之争"和"新实践美学与后实践美学之争"两部分,二者共同影响甚至决定了当下中国美学的格局和发展方向.通过历史回顾和理论反思,可以发现:"新实践美学"与"后实践美学"不仅实现了对"实践美学"的继承、批判和改造,从正反两方面共同推动了"实践美学"的多元发展,更利用西方现代哲学、美学思想资源,打破了"实践美学"一统天下的格局,在"美学热"退潮之后形成了"实践派""新实践派"与"后实践派"三足鼎立的复杂格局;同时,三者始终无法摆脱基本概念使用上的通约障碍,也无法规避自身的理论缺陷和思想局限,在如何理解和处理"现代性"与"中国性"的关系问题上也存在着根本差异.这场论争启示我们,在新时代,只有摆脱将中国与西方、古典与现代、旧与新(后)等相对立并以后者为尊的"非此即彼"式思维,坚持立足本土、融汇中西、多元共存、平等对话、面向现实、联系实践的立场,才可能在"实践美学"基础之上真正建立起"现代中国美学".