public value. The beauty. Basic aesthetic categories. What is beauty the beautiful as a value of culture

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

Volgograd State Agricultural Academy

Department: "____________________ »

Discipline: Ethics and aesthetics

abstract

On the topic: Public value. The beauty.

Performed:

second year student

departments, groups _22 EMZ, 04/040

Fastova Nadezhda Alexandrovna

Volgograd 2006

INTRODUCTION

The question of the nature of values and their role in public life directly related to the solution of many problems: the relationship between man and society, culture and civilization, nature and society, etc. In axiological categories - value, evaluation, value orientations, etc. - the theoretical potential of the culture of a certain society is embodied. They accumulate people's ideas about the significance of the most diverse phenomena of reality.

When considering this issue, it is necessary, first of all, to clearly identify the problem of values, and then to show the place and role of values in the development of society. The essence of the problem lies in the fact that the concept of "value" is very close in meaning to such concepts as "need", "good", "utility", etc., but is not reduced to them and has an independent content. The concept of "value" is internally contradictory. Value characterizes objective phenomena, or their properties, signs that are significant for people. And, therefore, it simultaneously presupposes the existence of a certain subject (albeit a potential one). This determines the specifics of the value attitude, the objective content of which is fixed in the concept of "value".

Therefore, it is necessary to turn Special attention to the fact that values are not a characteristic of a thing in itself in its natural being, but of phenomena of reality included directly or indirectly in social relations, value is a manifestation of the social being of a thing, and thus has a social nature.

The values that exist in society, actual and potential, essential and non-essential, constitute that side of the objective environment that directly affects the subject. Given this circumstance, we can single out the role of values in the life of society.

The value of actions, thoughts, and things belonging to a certain historical period lies both in how much they contribute to social progress, and in how great their role is in the self-improvement of the subject.

1. Value attitude on the part of the subject

On the one hand, evaluation is an integral component of consciousness, dependent on the subject; on the other hand, it is associated with value, i.e. depends on objective conditions.

It should be noted that the evaluation activity of the subject is not opposed to reflection. It cannot be considered that reflection of reality and making an assessment are two processes that are independent in their essence. The assessment reflects not all the properties of the object and not just properties, but objective qualities that are important for a person: the world is reflected from a certain point of view - significance for the subject.

Evaluative activity is carried out both by the mind of a person and by his feelings, and in different types activity combination of these points evaluation is different. So, for example, in science, rational assessment prevails, especially in relation to the results obtained, and in art - ideological and emotional.

Evaluation depends not only on the qualities of the objective value itself, but also on the social and individual qualities of the evaluating subject. They are determined by the specifics of the society in which the subject lives, his belonging to a certain class, nation or other social group, as well as individual characteristics a given person, his upbringing, education, character traits, temperament. This implies the possibility of a different assessment of the same phenomenon by different subjects living at the same time.

Considering the structure of the assessment, we can conditionally distinguish two sides:

1) fixing some objective characteristics of objects, properties, processes, etc.;

2) the attitude of the subject to the object - approval or condemnation, disposition or hostility, etc.

And if the first side of the assessment gravitates toward knowledge. That the other side - to the norm.

Here it is necessary to understand what a norm is, and what is its connection with the assessment. A norm is a generally recognized rule that directs and controls a person’s activities, his behavior, in accordance with the interests and values of society or individual groups of people. The norm acts as a requirement that prescribes or prohibits certain actions, based on the ideas of what is due in society. Therefore, the norm includes the moment of evaluation.

The internally contradictory nature of the assessment also determines its functions:

1. As a reflection of reality, awareness of the social significance of objects, evaluation performs an epistemological function, is a specific moment of cognition.

2. Evaluation expresses the orientation of cognition towards the use of knowledge in practice, forms an active attitude and orientation towards practical activity - let's call it the activating function of evaluation.

3. Variable function: assessment involves the choice, preference by the subject of any objects, their properties, relationships. The evaluation is formed on the basis of comparing phenomena with each other and correlating them with the norms and ideals existing in society.

4. Worldview function: assessment is a necessary condition for the formation, functioning and development of the subject's self-consciousness, since it is always associated with clarifying the significance of the surrounding world for him.

2. Classification of values

There are two main groups of values.

In the first case, the basis for classification is the features of the object, in the second case, the basis for classification is the subject of the value relation itself.

When considering the first subgroup, we can distinguish values material and spiritual.

Let us isolate the types of values depending on specific types of activity. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the coordination and subordination of values is determined by the hierarchy of spheres of public life.

Objects of nature, being included in the practical activities of people, become socially significant. They form a variety material values that can be called natural.

It should be taken into account that the development of material production is associated with a change in the capabilities and needs of people, and therefore leads to changes in natural values. If earlier they were primarily related to: the fertility of the earth, the presence of fish in reservoirs, fruits and game in forests, minerals, navigable rivers, etc., now, due to the destructive results of global human activity, both clean air and pure water, and the planet Earth itself as a whole. Therefore, among natural values, environmental values stand out.

Material values also include economic values. They also include the social significance of property relations and the labor process itself. And since the subjects occupy different positions in the system public relations, then the value of existing economic relations and activities is different for them.

It seems important to specifically consider the problem of labor as a value. Objectively, labor is always socially significant for society. But on the other hand, the alienation of labor leads to a decrease in its value for the subject, reaching its denial. Such an assessment of labor was reflected in Christian, in particular in the gospel, ethics, which contains teachings “not to worry about tomorrow”, comparing people with birds, grass, lilies, which “do not sow, do not reap, do not work, do not spin”. An ambiguous assessment of labor is also observed in folk art, where fairy tales reflect people's dreams of getting rid of labor by some magical powers.

The internally contradictory attitude to work as a value and at the same time its denial is very important for society. Dissatisfaction with work is an incentive for the subject to change the social relations in which labor is carried out, as well as the means of labor.

Because the relations of production and productive forces characterize various aspects of the development of social individuals, it is necessary to pay special attention to the problem of social values. These include: the life of a person, his civil and moral dignity, his freedom, as well as the achievements of national culture.

Political values are directly adjacent to social values. Singling them out as independent species justified as follows: political relations- these are relations between classes, nations and states, arising on the basis of their interests. Hence, by definition, political relations and the organizations that reinforce them have social significance. The role of these values is especially enhanced in difficult social situations, when accuracy and balance in political assessments are necessary.

To actually spiritual values include ethical and aesthetic values.

Considering ethical values, you need to pay attention to the following point. The specificity of ethical values lies in the fact that they do not have their material embodiment. Ethical values are objectified in traditions, customs, norms, ideals, etc.

Unlike ethical values, aesthetic values contain two layers. The first layer is sensual reality, natural qualities that form the external form of the object. The second layer of the aesthetic value of art objects is the result of the refraction of these properties through the prism of human experience, regardless of whether we are talking about the experience of society as a whole, one of the classes or an individual.

Thus, it is possible to determine the difference between the values of material and spiritual culture. The latter exist not only in objective form, but also as an act of activity, inseparable from the spiritual production itself. As a rule, they do not have a value form of expression and are not appropriated into personal property in the act of consumption. Spiritual values are not subject to obsolescence to the same extent as material values. Their consumption is not a passive act, on the contrary, in the process of their assimilation, a person is spiritually enriched, improves his inner world.

The types of values differ not only in the subject of the value relation, but also in the subject. From this point of view, the values individual, group(class, national, etc.) and universal.

Considering these types of values, one must keep in mind what is common to different subjects. All of them are formed in a specific historical setting, therefore, they bear the advantages and disadvantages of their time. On the one hand, they are limited by the objective conditions of their existence, on the other hand. Expressing development opportunities, they are ahead of their time and lay the foundations for the values of the future. Social subjects are guided in their activities by the system of values already established in society and at the same time change them, define new values for themselves. The subjects of a value relationship are interconnected, do not exist without each other, but each of them has its own characteristics.

Personal values are generated by the needs and interests of the individual, which can be both purely individual and personal refraction of more general interests. Each person is “immersed” in their own value system, which is different from the values of other people. What values prevail in a particular individual depends on the degree of development of the individual.

Attention should be paid to group values that are not reducible to the sum of the values of the individuals in the group. The fundamental interest of a group usually lies either in maintaining its position or in changing it. Socially significant for her are those values that contribute to the satisfaction of this interest. And if the values of the individual impede this process, then they are sacrificed to the interests of the group.

Considering the ratio of personal and group values, it should be noted that the group, as a rule, evaluates its own values higher than individual ones. But the following must also be taken into account: group and personal values may coincide in their basis. This happens when a person has learned the values of the group as his own, does not separate himself from the interests of the community. Much depends on the position in society the group occupies and what its significance for historical progress is.

Particular attention should be paid to the role and significance of enduring universal values. Human values grow out of individual and group (class, national) values that contribute to the development of the whole society. We can say that they synthesize, accumulate the best, the most progressive of personal and group values.

3. Social conditionality of value orientations, the nature of value orientations

The nature of value orientations is formed in the process of the subject's conscious choice of objects vital to him. Orientation can be considered as the relation of the subject to the conditions of his being, the relation in which the result of a free, evaluative choice of socially significant objects is manifested. Giving preference to certain values, he thereby directs his own destiny. At the same time, the subjective idea of value is not always adequate to the value itself. Genuine value helps to develop the abilities of a person as a social being. The nature of the orientation determines the type of behavior of the individual.

It should be noted that the type of orientation is determined both by the type of value and by the mode of activity of the subject. Thus, the preference given to purely individual values testifies to an egoistic value orientation. The choice of the values of other people (groups, humanity) as a goal characterizes a collectivist or altruistic orientation.

Types of value orientations depending on the way of activity:

consumer and creative, constructive and destructive, etc. Of course, such a selection is arbitrary, since in reality they are all interconnected, do not exist in their pure form. There is always only a certain predominance of any of them.

Particular attention should be paid to the fact that in the history of social thought, the preference for certain values is reflected in various theories. This is especially evident in contrast different options hedonism and asceticism, characteristic of religious ethics.

The latter forms its own value orientation: on the one hand, the dogma considers earthly life and all its values as untrue, transient, and as the highest value - eternal, heavenly life. But on the other hand, earthly life, since it is from God, must have some value. Hence, for example, the prohibition of suicide in religious ethics.

In contrast to the ascetic denial of the joys of life, hedonism prefers them first of all, considering pleasure and the absence of suffering as the highest value. Elements of hedonism are present in many philosophical theories. Its origins can be found in the views of ancient Greek thinkers, especially Aristippus. His ideas are also present in the views of the philosophers of the New Age and the Enlightenment: Hobbes, Locke, Helvetius, Holbach, etc. If classical hedonism, recognizing the enjoyment of the good, talked about the right of all people to it, then the ethical hedonists of our time preach the enjoyment of one at the expense of the other , "strong" at the expense of "weak".

Close to hedonism is eudemonism, the ancestor of which was Epicurus. Eudemonism proclaims happiness (bliss) as the highest value of life, but understands it, unlike hedonism, not just as sensual pleasure, but as an achievement of inner freedom. Eudemonistic ethics is characterized by an active humanistic orientation, and this is its merit. But eudemonism gives the concept of happiness a supra-historical, some absolute meaning, while it is socially conditioned. This abstract understanding of happiness demonstrates the limitations of eudemonism and hedonism.

A fundamentally different approach to understanding values can be traced in the ethics of such an outstanding representative of classical German philosophy as Kant. He proclaimed that every person is an end in itself and in no case should be considered as a means of accomplishing any tasks.

It should be noted that, according to Kant, the objectively universally significant content of human activity is created by a moral law, which acts as a categorical imperative, i.e. such a rule that should be observed not for any other purpose, but for its own sake. “Do so,” he wrote, “so that the maxim of your will may at the same time have the force of the principle of universal legislation.” Acts performed solely out of a sense of duty, without any inclination to them, have a true moral value, in his opinion. But, while sharply condemning the moral vices of bourgeois society, Kant nevertheless believed that the practical implementation of the moral law was impossible.

The highest goal of a humane, democratic society is a person, a free person who has the opportunities and conditions for the realization of all his abilities. Its formation means such a resolution of the contradiction between the individual and society, when there is no subordination of personal interests to public ones and not even their merging, but their dialectical interrelation is carried out: the interests of the individual represent an objective value for society, and public interests are significant for each person. The unifying factor in this case is labor, which is both socially and individually significant: labor as the development of a person's creative abilities.

It must be borne in mind that a specific feature of the ideal is its aspiration to the future. Ideally, people seem to project promising social relations. The ideal cannot be imposed from outside, it is an act of free choice. Therefore, an ideal is always a value, an assessment, and an element of value orientation. In this regard, ideals have great attractive power, generate inspiration and energy. The ideal acts as a goal towards which a person strives.

But the experience of mankind has developed moral criteria, which in certain socio-historical parameters act as limiting and absolute. These criteria are simple norms of morality, expressing the most fundamental and universal interests. And in the universal ideals of freedom, equality, justice, etc. reflects a single trend of the progressive development of society, which enhances their mutual influence on the course of history.

Previously, beauty was considered the subject of aesthetics.

One of the first in European aesthetics is the interpretation of aesthetic categories in the subjective-anthropological aspect, originating from Socrates (5th-6th centuries BC). For him, the central aesthetic category is the beautiful, which he understands as a certain expediency. Beautiful is a thing that is suitable for something, in this sense, both the golden shield of Achilles and the skillfully made basket for carrying manure are beautiful.

In relation to a person, the beautiful acts as an ideal, which is understood by Socrates as a person beautiful in spirit and body. Socrates introduces the concept of kalokagatiya into aesthetics. Which will become one of the main concepts and principles in the construction of the theory of European aesthetics.

The beautiful is projected through a person and onto art, since art, according to Socrates, is the transfer of the state of the soul in an image-generalization. Although Socrates does not yet have a developed system of aesthetic concepts, he nevertheless very definitely places the beautiful in its various modifications at the center of the aesthetic.

Chernyshevsky defines the aesthetic ideal as an increase in beauty in human society and correlates it with the social ideal, the ideal of human life.

The father of "real aesthetics" Etienne Souriau, his small categories are: beautiful - the external form of beauty, as an expression of good luck, grandiose - as a perfect but stable balance, graceful - as moderation, simplicity and hidden strength.

The central category of Platonic aesthetics is also beautiful, interpreted in an objectively idealistic spirit. In general, the doctrine of being Plato ("Parmenides", "Sophist") also considers the problem of ascent, knowledge of the higher ideas of goodness, goodness and beauty (beautiful).

And in this process, the idea of the beautiful is revealed at the highest level of ascent - intellectual intuition, since the beautiful can be neither useful nor suitable. The beautiful is an idea that has its own being, which is not sensible, has no form, it is only intelligible. Moreover, this intellect is a remembrance (anamnesis) of the immortal soul of the eternal idea of the beautiful, as well as the ideas of goodness and goodness, which are both the cause and purpose of being.

Consistent contemplation of the beautiful is the education of the soul through erotic ascent.

This process is hierarchical. It begins with the ability to contemplate beautiful sensual things (bodies), rises to the contemplation of spiritual beauty (deeds and customs), and ends with the contemplation of the beauty of knowledge (ideas). Here wings sprout from the soul and it ascends into the world of ideas.

But since for Plato the sensible world is becoming (something that exists between being and non-being), then the knowledge of the beautiful is a movement from non-being to being.

But the discovery of the idea of beauty is not cognition in the strict sense of the word, it is a sudden illumination of the mind by the sight of beauty, and it is accessible only to the elect.

According to Plato, beauty is “something felt at first sight, something that the soul perceives as long ago familiar and, having recognized it, welcomes it and merges with it.

I also exist principles of systematization.

The principles of systematization are universal, philosophical and aesthetic in nature:

As we can see, there are three sections in the systematics, but we will consider only one aesthetic category that directly relates to the topic (beauty), namely, the section reflecting objective states.

Aesthetic categories reflecting objective states are understood as the most fundamental, key concepts of aesthetics, in which the aesthetic aspect reflects the diversity of the perfect that exists outside of us in nature, in society and in public consciousness.

The first such category - the beautiful - should be defined as the perfect harmonic. In the beautiful, positive perfection is most fully expressed, the tendency of development in nature, society and spiritual life is expressed.

“The secret of beauty (i.e. the beautiful), - emphasizes N.A. Dmitrieva, - lies in harmonious relationships that form unity in diversity ...”

But what is the essence of harmony? So, for example, V.P. Shestakov believes that harmony is a kind of integrity in which there is a “qualitative difference and even opposition of its constituent elements”

Thus, it seems that harmony is an outwardly consistent whole in which all elements are balanced. Qualitative difference and opposition is a property of relations between the forms of the perfect. Harmony is a “special case” of the perfect, expressing the trend of development in objective reality, i.e. from an aesthetic point of view, it is beautiful.

In my opinion, the essence of beauty is most accurately defined by traditional Japanese aesthetics, in which there are four basic concepts that define the essence of beauty, or beauty: sabi, wabi, shibui, yugen.

Sabi is natural beauty, born of the temporary existence of an object or work of art.

“The Japanese see a special charm in the traces of age,” writes Vsevolod Ovchinnikov. “They are attracted by the darkened color of the old tree, the mossy stone in the garden, or even the shabbyness - traces of many hands touching the edge of the picture.” In this concept, the properties of beauty in nature and its organic connection with art are very clearly reflected.

“Wabi,” Ovchinnikov writes further, “is the absence of anything pretentious, catchy, picturesque. Wabi is the charm of the ordinary, wise restraint, the beauty of simplicity. Not only a picture or a vase, but any piece of household utensils, whether it is a spatula for laying rice or a bamboo teapot stand, can be a work of art and the epitome of beauty. Practicality, utilitarian beauty of objects - that's what is associated with the concept of wabi.

Both of these concepts, expressing the aesthetic properties of nature and art, are combined into a whole, expressed through the concept of shibuy. “Shibui is the beauty of the prostate plus the beauty of being natural. This is not beauty in general, but the beauty inherent in the purpose of this object, as well as the material from which it is made. There is no need to decorate a dagger with an ornament. It should feel the sharpness of the blade and the quality factor of hardening. A cup is good if it is convenient and pleasant to drink tea from it, and if at the same time it retains the original charm of clay that has been in the hands of a potter.

These three concepts reflect the ancient tradition of Japanese aesthetic culture, which is largely associated with Shintoism.

The fourth concept - yugen - is of a later origin, its content is already associated with the Buddhist culture of Japan.

Yugen "embodies the mastery of hint or subtext, the beauty of understatement" and moreover, it is associated with the general concept of India, China, Japan of a certain period of their existence - the concept of incompleteness.

Beautiful, beauty in this concept is understood as something eternal and instantaneous, as a dialectical unity of the individual and the universal, the future and the present.

And summarizing all the above said about beauty, it is necessary to say what beauty is in the social sense. And in the social sense, beauty is the affirmation of an optimistic view of the world as a whole, in its eternity and harmony, which is most fully realized in a perfect social order.

In this aspect, A. Kuchinskaya’s statement that “the vagueness of the concept of beauty and the lack of accuracy of its definition not only does not interfere with its impact, but even more strengthens it, increases the social role of beauty in modern world". This idea leads to a clear social relativism, removes the general social aspects of understanding beauty as social perfection. And by no means increases, but reduces the role of beauty in human life.

This relativistic principle of A. Kuchinskaya is concretized in the following reasoning: "If there are no prescriptions and norms indicating what is considered beautiful ... then we ourselves are forced to decide each time whether we like this thing or not."

The absence of social norms is by no means a virtue, but a lack of social and spiritual life; as is known, any norm regulates and improves relations in society, relations in which must be universally harmonious and perfect, i.e. beautiful.

In the socio-aesthetic aspect, this principle most fully expresses the essence of the perfect harmony of social life, i.e. is the social expression of beauty.

LIST OF USED LITERATURE

1. Seminar classes in philosophy: Proc. - method. allowance / A.P. Goryachev, Yu.M. Lopantsev, V.A. Meyder and others; under. ed. K.M. Nikonova - M.: Vyssh.shk., 1991 - 287 p.

Volgograd State Agricultural Academy

Department: "____________________ »

Discipline: Ethics and aesthetics

abstract

On the topic: Public value. The beauty.

Performed:

second year student

departments, groups _22 EMZ, 04/040

Fastova Nadezhda Alexandrovna

Volgograd 2006

INTRODUCTION

The question of the nature of values and their role in public life is directly related to the solution of many problems: the relationship between man and society, culture and civilization, nature and society, etc. In axiological categories - value, evaluation, value orientations, etc. - the theoretical potential of the culture of a certain society is embodied. They accumulate people's ideas about the significance of the most diverse phenomena of reality.

Therefore, it is necessary to pay special attention to the fact that values are not a characteristic of a thing in itself in its natural being, but of the phenomena of reality included directly or indirectly in social relations, value is a manifestation of the social being of a thing, and thus has a social nature.

1. Value attitude on the part of the subject

On the one hand, evaluation is an integral component of consciousness, dependent on the subject; on the other hand, it is associated with value, i.e. depends on objective conditions.

Evaluation activity is carried out both by the human mind and by his feelings, and in different types of activity the combination of these moments of evaluation is different. So, for example, in science, rational assessment prevails, especially in relation to the results obtained, and in art - ideological and emotional.

Evaluation depends not only on the qualities of the objective value itself, but also on the social and individual qualities of the evaluating subject. They are determined by the specifics of the society in which the subject lives, his belonging to a certain class, nation or other social group, as well as the individual characteristics of this person, his upbringing, education, character traits, temperament. This implies the possibility of a different assessment of the same phenomenon by different subjects living at the same time.

Considering the structure of the assessment, we can conditionally distinguish two sides:

1) fixing some objective characteristics of objects, properties, processes, etc.;

2) the attitude of the subject to the object - approval or condemnation, disposition or hostility, etc.

And if the first side of the assessment gravitates toward knowledge. That the other side - to the norm.

The internally contradictory nature of the assessment also determines its functions:

1. As a reflection of reality, awareness of the social significance of objects, evaluation performs an epistemological function, is a specific moment of cognition.

2. Classification of values

There are two main groups of values.

In the first case, the basis for classification is the features of the object, in the second case, the basis for classification is the subject of the value relation itself.

When considering the first subgroup, we can distinguish values material and spiritual .

Objects of nature, being included in the practical activities of people, become socially significant. They form a variety material values that can be called natural.

It should be taken into account that the development of material production is associated with a change in the capabilities and needs of people, and therefore leads to changes in natural values. If earlier they were primarily related to: the fertility of the earth, the presence of fish in reservoirs, fruits and game in forests, minerals, navigable rivers, etc., now, due to the destructive results of global human activity, both clean air and clean water, and the planet Earth itself as a whole. Therefore, among natural values, environmental values stand out.

To material values include economic values. They also include the social significance of property relations and the labor process itself. And since the subjects occupy different positions in the system of social relations, the value of existing economic relations and activities is different for them.

For example, for a class that dominates the economy, the existing economic relations are valuable, for a subordinate class they are not, and such a class-subject will not protect and protect them, but, on the contrary, will strive to change them.

Since the relations of production and productive forces characterize various aspects of the development of social individuals, it is necessary to pay special attention to the problem of social values. These include: the life of a person, his civil and moral dignity, his freedom, as well as the achievements of national culture.

Political values are directly adjacent to social values. Their selection as an independent species is justified as follows: political relations are relations between classes, nations and states that arise on the basis of their interests. Hence, by definition, political relations and the organizations that reinforce them have social significance. The role of these values is especially enhanced in difficult social situations, when accuracy and balance in political assessments are necessary.

Man by his very existence is separated from the animal world. This forces a person to treat the facts of his existence in a differentiated way. A person is almost constantly in a state of tension, which he tries to resolve by answering the famous question of Socrates "What is good?" A person is interested not just in the truth, which would represent the object as it is in itself, but in the meaning of the object for a person, to satisfy his needs.

An individual differentiates the facts of his life according to their significance, evaluates them, and realizes a value attitude towards the world. Thus, it is a generally recognized fact that people have different assessments of seemingly the same situations.

Value is what people's feelings dictate to put above everything and make them strive for it. Everything that has a certain significance, personal or social meaning for a person is valuable for a person. The quantitative characteristic of this sense is the assessment.

Undoubtedly, the recognition of such eternal values as truth, beauty and goodness (and each value separately) is a hallmark of the humane in man. Certain disagreements make themselves felt when the relation of values to each other is considered. Some thinkers seriously bring together values. “Beautiful is the complete expression of the Good. Good is the complete expression of the Beautiful,” R. Tagore believed. According to Socrates, knowledge, truth, is good. G. Flaubert is also categorical: "Everything that is beautiful is moral." Other authors are less optimistic: “The concept of beauty not only does not coincide with good, but rather is opposite to it, since good for the most part coincides with the victory over passions, while beauty is the basis of all our passions ”(L. N. Tolstoy). It turns out that the complete reduction of one value to another is untenable. B. Pascal remarks that "the heart has its own mind, which is unknown to our mind." Sometimes it is impossible to reduce one value to another, but it is possible to present their relationship.

There are countless statements in which, in one form or another, the complementarity of truth, beauty and goodness, as well as their equals: mind, heart and will, is emphasized. V. Hugo wrote: “Great love is inseparable from a deep mind, the breadth of the mind is equal to the depth of the heart; that is why great hearts, they are minds, reach the extreme peaks of humanity. The height of feelings is in direct proportion to the depth of thought. Heart and mind are the two limbs of balance.” The philosopher sees in this reasoning the concept of direct proportionality (V. Hugo speaks of direct correlation) of truth and beauty.

Truth, beauty and goodness, complementing each other, form something like a positive unity (V. S. Solovyov). Truth is not beauty, and beauty is not reducible to good, but nevertheless each of the three values in a certain sense points to the other. I. Kant once defined beauty as a symbol of moral goodness. The category of the symbol here, in our opinion, did not appear by chance. The three values under consideration are connected with each other not by a simple, but by a very complex symbolic connection. They express the fullness of human life. With all the desire, a person cannot in any way limit his being to one of the three spheres: knowledge, feelings, action. Because of this, man unites truth, beauty and goodness. Anyone who claims that truth is above all will immediately be pointed out to the virtues of beauty and goodness. Whoever considers beauty the pinnacle of man loses sight of truth and goodness. And he who insists on the priority of the good has not fully appreciated the merits of truth and beauty. A person achieves the fullness of life in the unity of all values, achieving their harmony, mutual reinforcement, resonance. Of course

truth (truth), beauty (beautiful) and goodness are ideals, next to which their antipodes are constantly found: error (and lies), ugliness and evil. To which pole a person will aspire is, of course, a matter of his philosophical choice, his freedom, his responsibility to himself personally and to others.

When discussing culture in relation to the sphere of aesthetic and artistic phenomena, first of all, it is necessary to clarify the meaning of the adjective definition “aesthetic” (and then “artistic”) in its relation to culture.

What exactly does aesthetic processing, aesthetic design, spiritualization, ennoblement by people mean? environment and themselves? The meaning of the concept of “aesthetic” is interpreted by theorists in very different ways. We will not go into the subtleties of their disputes. With all the research disagreements, it is obvious that the sphere of aesthetic phenomena is, first of all, the sphere of beauty and art, to the extent that it is associated with beauty. The field of “aesthetic” in life is the area of such interactions of a person with the world, in which a kind of sensual experience of the beauty or ugliness of certain phenomena of reality arises or is created.

There are no such sensory experiences in nature. They appear precisely in the course of the development of culture. In order for them to appear, people's feelings had to be “processed”, transformed in order to become, in the words of K. Marx, “theorists” feelings. so that, without losing their physiological and psychological basis, feelings can still go into the realm of the spirit, and at the same time remain feelings. Man gradually became, and remains, capable of experiencing sensual pleasure from what is called beauty and sensual aversion to ugliness, ugliness.

It can be simple pleasure, say, from the sight and smell of a flower, or it can be disgust caused by a pile of dirt. It can be a complex sensual experience of tragedy in life or in art, tragedy as a “perishing beauty”. This may be an emotional rejection of the ugly, showing its absurdity in the comical situation, if the ugliness is relatively safe. And then it causes laughter. And if the absurdity is threatening, laughter can become evil - satire.

The aesthetic interaction of a person with the world, therefore, is an initial value interaction. And just as for the sphere of morality the central value is good (in its opposition to evil), so for the sphere of "aesthetic" - beauty, or "beautiful". Ugliness, ugliness are not values, because value manifests in itself only a positive significance. But it is precisely in relation to the ugly (to its various modifications) that the opposite manifestations of the beautiful reveal themselves to them.

Gracefulness is the brink of beauty, and clumsiness is ugliness. So it is with grace and rudeness. And if, for example, clumsiness is cute, then it has become a specific facet of beauty as a value.

Culture is in the sphere of aesthetic phenomena and is based on the possibility for a person to have special sensory experiences: enjoyment of beauty and aversion to ugliness. Aesthetic culture in general is the processing, design, ennoblement, spiritualization by a person of the environment and himself, directed towards the sensual affirmation of beauty and the denial (rejection) of ugliness. An aesthetically cultured person is able and sensibly disposed to perceive, experience and generate (create) beauty: in contemplation, actions, relationships, in particular in artistic creativity. And the main condition for the existence and implementation of aesthetic culture is the so-called aesthetic taste, i.e. human ability to distinguish between the beautiful and the ugly, beauty and ugliness. What is meant is the sensual distinction between the one and the other, which can be coarse and more subtle (refined taste). Aesthetic taste is not just an indicator and criterion of aesthetic culture. It contributes to the orientation of a person in the realm of aesthetic values, the central of which is beauty.

Beauty as a central aesthetic value

However, thinkers have been arguing about what beauty, or “beautiful”, has been from ancient times to this day. Moreover, on the one hand, they constantly emphasize the undeniable importance of beauty as one of the highest, absolute values of life and culture. On the other hand, they just as constantly talk about the relativity of beauty, the variability of its criteria, the subjectivity of assessments. As stated in one folk proverb: "for some beauty in the hair, for others in the bald head." And at the same time, people die and kill for beauty, they strive for it, they hope that it will help save the world.

Everyone seems to know what beauty is. But no one has yet succeeded in successfully defining it, revealing its foundations, explaining why one or another phenomenon is beautiful, and another is ugly.

Some aestheticians tried to find the basis for explaining beauty in nature, taken without regard to man. They argued that objectively, by themselves, crystals, corals, butterflies, forests and lakes are beautiful. They are beautiful, allegedly because they show a special natural harmony, expressed in orderliness. constituent parts, symmetry, proportionality, etc. However, no natural-objective order (symmetry, proportionality, proportionality, etc.), no objective color or sound ratios in themselves act as beauty. For, firstly, symmetrical, proportional, proportional - not necessarily beautiful. And secondly, there can be no question of beauty at all if there is no one who is able to perceive and appreciate it.

Nature without man knows neither the beautiful nor the ugly.

But beauty is not a purely subjective assessment, not only an internal sensual experience. Something is perceived and experienced, not nothing. What we call beauty is generated and appears only in the interaction of a person with the world, with its phenomena that have become carriers of aesthetic value. Beauty is not only an assessment, it is precisely a value, that is, a value attitude, a special, aesthetic attitude.

Like any spiritual value, beauty is generated in society, it is the value of culture. And like any spiritual value, it is realized in the lives of specific people, in specific situations.

Taken in this sense, beauty is essentially a relationship between a person and a particular phenomenon. It is between, because the subjective “relation to” (the relation of a person to a phenomenon, its emotional-sensory assessment) is included in a holistic value relationship, in what is called beauty as a value. Like any value, beauty can be embodied in different ways. Carriers of beauty can be different. It can be a mathematical formula, a temple, a crystal, a coral, a flower, a person's face or body. But beauty does not belong to the bearers, although it is objectified in them. In order for beauty as a value to be realized, “manifested”, in addition to its bearer, in each case a person is also needed who is able to “de-objectify”, sensually “read”, experience it. The carrier is always only a material sign of what can act as beauty, if there is someone for whom this sign is peculiarly significant, who, when interacting with the carrier, can have a sensual experience of beauty (or, as a secondary one, at least awareness of it). presence). A person experiences beauty, enjoys it, but experience, enjoyment arises only in interaction with a carrier that is significant for him.

It is completely meaningless to talk about the beauty of a mathematical formula if there are no people who know mathematics and are able to experience sensual pleasure from what in this case acts as beauty. But, on the other hand, the beauty of a formula exists only when the formula itself exists (and not every one is beautiful!). And human face, which is perceived as beautiful (by this person, this era, this culture, in this layer of society) - has some features, and not just the correctness of features. But what are these features? What is beauty? Beauty is perhaps the most difficult value to define. In general, beauty can apparently be imagined as a relationship between a person and the world (some kind of phenomenon), expressing the moment of ultimate humanization, spirituality of a specific human sensuality. Such an attitude arises when the phenomenon is highly significant, but significant not utilitarian, not in terms of its use. In this case, one speaks of “interested disinterest” (I. Kant), of the disinterestedness of feelings. The phenomenon turns out to be spiritually significant and, at the same time, sensually attractive.

When we, for example, admire fruits in the garden or a still life depicting fruits, the pleasure in the sight of fruits may be completely unrelated to their taste, with the desire to eat them (having received utilitarian pleasure). And yet, we (not all and not always) strive to enjoy the contemplation of phenomena as beautiful, we seem to care only about the spiritually significant form of these phenomena, which we sensually evaluate. This is true, and not entirely true.

The fact is that in this case it is not the form itself that is experienced, but the organicity of the embodiment in this sensual form - the meaningful spirituality of the person himself, his “sensual humanity”, so to speak. The German philosopher Hegel believed that, for example, for art: “Sensual appearance in the beautiful, the form of immediacy as such, is at the same time the certainty of content ...”. Speaking in the language of Hegel, we can say about the form (as applied to beauty) that it is a form of nature that expresses the spirit, a characteristic, meaningful form. Apparently, pleasure itself, the experience of beauty as a value arises then (and therefore) when a person feels whole, able to elevate his feelings to the limit (not limitless!) spiritual height. The special significance of the form in the aesthetic sense (which many researchers write about) lies precisely in the fact that it is a concrete-sensual form that expresses the human content, the truly human meaning of the phenomenon, its integral value in the most organic way. In this regard, the humanization of the world is its design. And for the artist, and for the one who enjoys art, beauty, the form is “infinitely dear because it is the bearer of the soul, which will open to you alone and tell you yours”. The form becomes a concrete-sensual expression of the spiritual value of a phenomenon that has become a bearer of beauty (as a relationship between it and a person who emotionally evaluates it).

The possibility of the emergence of just such a relationship is determined by the characteristics of both the person and the phenomenon with which he interacts. A phenomenon must have (or acquire) some special properties, qualities, so that it can become an object of aesthetic attitude, a bearer of beauty. In different eras, in different communities, these are different properties. A person interacting with this phenomenon must be aesthetically developed in order to be able to sensually appreciate these properties, experience them as beauty, experience pleasure from it.

Not only, say, a fresh rose can give rise to a sensual expression of a person's humanity - an aesthetic attitude, enjoyment of beauty. The grace of the snake can evoke the same thing, although the snake in other cases looks disgusting, disgusting.

But here's a bunch (pardon!) "shit" does not cause aesthetic pleasure for anyone. However, the most wonderful rose will cause aesthetic delight only if the person is not “blind” (physically or spiritually), and if he is attuned to sensual interaction with the flower.

It is unlikely that such an “explanation” of beauty as a value is exhaustive. It is hardly at all possible to exhaustively explain and even more so define beauty. For in it there has always been, is and will be a moment of mystery, something inexplicable in the usual logic of concepts. Something that requires not so much rational understanding as feeling. Something that is better expressed in the language of the arts than in the language of science.

The aesthetic taste of a person can be specially developed, brought up, enriched to a certain extent. But at the base of it still remains something irrational, as in culture in general, something, as they say, "from God" given. True, it does not follow from this that one cannot think about beauty, taste, and other aesthetic values, although all reasoning about this is by no means indisputable.

If we take as a basis the value structure in the G.P.

Vyzhletsov, then beauty (as a value) can act as either significance, or a norm, or an ideal. G.P. himself

Vyzhletsov believes that aesthetic value embodies the unity of “significant and desired (due), existing and ideal”.

Apparently so it is. But in specific cases, in specific individuals or social groups one can dominate.

Beauty can still be perceived, experienced and understood primarily as significance (usefulness, reasonableness).

Attempts to understand beauty in this way, in any case, not as an integral value, but primarily through significance, are very characteristic. They express a utilitarian-reasonable attitude towards beauty and, in general, towards aesthetic values. The English philosopher of modern times, G. Hobbes, believed that beauty is a combination of the properties of an object, which give us reason to expect good from it. Other researchers have repeatedly noted that aesthetically significant, in a variety of societies, is what was once useful (although this is far from always the case). In general, in this case, what is considered beautiful is that which is useful, expedient, functional, convenient. The understanding of beauty as expediency is often characteristic of designers, architects, designers. Some aircraft designers have expressed the belief that a beautiful aircraft is one that flies well. For aircraft construction or for industrial design, perhaps this is the case. The coincidence of aesthetic value and functionality is essential here. But in general, beauty is not reducible to expediency, although proportionality, symmetry, proportionality, etc., are related to the experience of beauty in certain historical periods, when orderliness, harmony of being and its fragments are especially valued (and on a sensual level).

However, in a variety of cultures, there are ideas about beauty that do not fit into the understanding of it as significance. These ideas are usually expressed in certain norms, canons, established styles, stable group tastes. In one of the African tribes, it was considered very beautiful for people to have rare front teeth. In another, the girls had their two front teeth removed. And only girls without them could be considered beautiful. And in the third (in Mozambique), a leader who lost his front tooth was considered such a freak that he could no longer be a leader. If there was any expediency in all this, it is not known when and what. And even now we consider beautiful not at all what is expedient, reasonable, useful, but most often what has become customary in connection with life in a certain environment. At the level of the norm, what is beautiful, first of all, is what is considered as such in society in accordance with the prevailing tastes, canons and social ideals.

In its self-worth and independence, beauty manifests itself only as an individualized ideal. At the same time, what is beautiful is that which is revealed as beauty in individual experience, regardless of either the usefulness of the phenomenon, or the norms and canons. Another thing is that the existing norm, style can be internally accepted, not contradict individual taste.

Beauty, as a realizable ideal, is non-utilitarian, it is valuable in itself, and the desire for it is sensual, personal. But personal, individual does not mean what no one else has.

The personal experience of beauty is a special expression of its universal significance, its human value. Significance in this sense, the norm and the ideal, together form beauty as the highest value, in the event that the norm turns out to be individualized and internally accepted, and significance is felt as a universal, truly supreme expediency, and not rational rationality, not primitive utility.

Thus, beauty as a value of culture is a relation in which the humanity of a person is sensually expressed in his interaction with the world. F. Schiller believed that “beauty must be understood as necessary condition beings of humanity." Aesthetic culture consists in the ability, firstly, to distinguish between beauty and ugliness (aesthetic taste), the ability to experience beauty as a value. And this is an expression of the processed, formalized, ennobled, spirituality of the sensual nature of man.

Secondly, aesthetic culture implies the ability and ability of a person to transform the world, processing it, shaping it, ennobling it, spiritualizing it - through the generation of beauty in it and overcoming ugliness. This, the latter, is, as it were, concentrated and deployed in man's artistic assimilation of the world, in artistic activity, in art.

Culture and artistic activity. Culture and art

Artistic activity is a special kind of human activity, unique in its relation to culture. This is the only activity, the main content, the meaning of which is the creation, storage, functioning and transfer of spiritual values. This activity is directly aimed at “processing”, design, ennoblement, spiritualization of the world surrounding a person, and on the person himself. In artistic activity and its results, the culture of an epoch, period, country, ethnos is revealed more vividly, more directly than in anything else.

The concept of "artistic activity" includes artistic creativity and its results (artistic values), artistic perception of the phenomena of reality and works of art. In this usage, the concept of “artistic activity” largely coincides with the concept of “art”. True, the term “art” is sometimes used in a narrower sense: as just a collection of works of art (excluding the processes of their creation and perception), or as only a specific high-level skill (not including then its results). With a broader understanding (which we will continue to use), art is a special sphere of human activity, purposeful, conscious in its meaning, specialized artistic activity (artistic creativity) and its results (artistic works, works of art), their functioning and perception.

In general, artistic activity and art as its specialized expression are possible because there are aesthetic relations and aesthetic values.

The aesthetic attitude is necessarily present in the artistic conception, and in artistic creativity, and in artistic perception. If a work does not give rise to an aesthetic relationship, then it is not a work of art, or does not act as such for a given person. Aesthetic attitude is both a means and a goal of a particular artistic activity.

But of course it is not the only means and not the only end. Only in the simplest cases (ornament, elementary decoration of some thing) aesthetic and artistic practically coincide. That is, in these cases, artistic activity is aimed at creating an aesthetic value, an aesthetic attitude. And if the latter occurs, the goal is achieved. In other cases, developed professional art, using the features of aesthetic relations, solves much more complex problems.

Artistic creativity is a kind of comprehension by a person of the world and himself in it. Comprehension, expressed in the specific design of matter, in the aesthetic organization of special sensually perceived signs, in special languages (languages of sounds, lines, movements, rhythms, words, etc.).

Comprehension is usually multilayered and multifunctional. In art, any natural phenomena, all various human relations. A work of art may contain religious, philosophical, moral, political layers of life's problems. And acting on the one who perceives this work (listens to music, reads poetry), art awakens his thoughts and feelings, excites a range of artistically significant meanings.

The artistic idea, in the words of A. A. Potebnya, “develops in the one who understands, as his artistic thought, his aesthetic experience.”

Art is also a special kind of extra-scientific knowledge about the world and, most importantly, about man, about his spirit. This is such knowledge, which is unattainable in any other way than artistic thinking. At the same time, the artist can depict not beauty and express not aesthetic delight, but, let's say, his indignation or even disgust in relation to ugliness, all sorts of life's dirt, inhumanity. In this regard, artistic values are wider than aesthetic ones. Their carriers, signs, sign systems (such as a temple, a painting, an icon, a poem, a play, etc.) can embody a variety of content. Artistic comprehension is available to all spheres of nature, life, culture.

However, this emotional embodiment of the content, comprehension, becomes artistically effective, and its result - a work - acts as an artistic value only under certain indispensable conditions. Firstly, if it is a sensual embodiment of meanings, comprehension of oneself and the world, it is aesthetically significant. If all the layers, all the meanings of a work of art (religious, philosophical, moral, etc.) are “drawn” by the artist into the field of aesthetic relations. Secondly, a work is artistically valuable only if there are those who are able to artistically “comprehend” this work.

The artist, creating works of art, artistic values, reproduces aesthetic values and creates new ones, one way or another generating beauty. Generating it, at least in the form of an expression of artistic thought, organically embodying the artistic content. Generating a sense of beauty, both in oneself and in those to whom art is addressed. And the feeling, having been born, again and again attracts a person to this and similar artistic values.

Art is therefore one of the most powerful means of educating aesthetic culture and culture in general. For in art, the spiritual becomes visible, audible, tangible and, at the same time, a sensually attractive, desirable concrete manifestation of the human in a person, exciting him, capable of capturing his entire being.

But this can only happen if a person encounters real art, and if his aesthetic and artistic taste is sufficiently developed. Moreover, again, artistic taste is based on aesthetic taste, i.e. ability to distinguish, first of all, beauty and ugliness. But a developed artistic taste, based on this, is already the ability to distinguish artistic values (from what is not valuable, from fakes, imitations) - in all their richness, including not actually aesthetic elements.

Artistic taste is one of the main indicators of the presence, nature and level of a person's artistic culture (and artistic tastes are the culture of a social group).

Artistic culture is, firstly, the development in people and the realization in their lives of artistic abilities, the ability to create artistic values and perceive them as such. Secondly, artistic culture is the very creation of artistic values, artistic creativity, i.e. artistic processing, decoration, refinement, spiritualization different materials, things, processes, etc., as well as the creation of artificial, aesthetically and artistically significant, forms and meanings, the creation of works of art. Thirdly, artistic culture is revealed in the functioning of artistic values, leading to the ennoblement, spiritualization of people interacting with them.

Artistic culture is closely connected not only with the aesthetic, but also with all other aspects and spheres of culture. And, like culture in general, it is realized not in the abstract, but in specific conditions, in different ways, to different extents, at different levels. There are aesthetically and artistically cultured people and their groups in different ways and to varying degrees.

Aesthetic and artistic culture at different levels

The complete absence of aesthetic and artistic culture would mean that a person (or a group of society) has so undeveloped feelings that he cannot distinguish beauty from ugliness at all, is completely unable to experience pleasure from beauty (and disgust for ugliness), from artistic values, nor to create something more or less aesthetically or artistically valuable. Such a pre-cultural and, in this sense, pre-human state has been impossible since man has become a man.

Let's leave aside difficult questions about when and how aesthetic relations appeared in the process of the formation of mankind, when and how they appear in the process of child development, when art is born and how attitudes towards it are formed. Normally, all people are at least aesthetically receptive to one degree or another. Aesthetic and artistic culture is realized in one way or another in their lives, existing and manifesting itself, however, in different ways, to different degrees, at different levels.

The lowest level of aesthetic culture is determined primarily by the fact that the main dominant needs of people (who are on it) are utilitarian needs. These are vital needs, the needs of one's physical existence (in particular health), property well-being, comfort of being (material and not very high spiritual). In general, for a person of this level, first of all, their own are valuable: benefit, success, comfort, sometimes the ordinary reasonableness of life, sometimes the desired or habitual unreasonableness of it. In this regard, the possibilities for the implementation of aesthetic and artistic culture are very limited.

After all, beauty in this case may be significant, but it is not a real value. The significance of beauty can be manifested in the fact that it can give a person pleasure, perhaps even pleasure. But, firstly, the simplest, elementary and obvious manifestations of beauty are usually valued. Something that entertains the not too subtle feelings of this person. What caresses his sight or hearing, what is accessible, understandable and, in general, familiar. Something that does not require special sensual richness, depth of feelings, their tension. What can affect them is superficial, so to speak. These can be natural phenomena (flowers, landscapes, birdsong...) or traditional habitual values accessible to people of this level: a naturalistic image of the same natural phenomena, simple melodic music. In the theater - light everyday comedy, operetta, melodrama. In literature and cinema, it is a simple detective or love story, with a happy or “tearful” ending.

Secondly, what is connected with the first, for people of this level, utilitarian, useful, convenient, functional, ordinary reasonable - in general, is always more important than beautiful or highly artistic. The significance of both beauty and art in almost every respect is limited, given and determined by utilitarianism. Well, let's say prestige. It is prestigious to have jewelry (on oneself and in the house), beautiful things, sometimes works of art, often a beautiful wife. Moreover, beautiful at this level is usually what is considered as such in a circle of people of the same level, although occasionally it is something that allows you to somehow stand out. Beauty often comes down to external beauty. Its expressions are external brilliance, brightness, flashiness.

In addition, what is useful can also be considered beautiful. In the peasant environment, for example, female beauty was associated primarily with health, necessary both for work and for the production of offspring, healthy workers. In the aristocratic environment, the traits of weakness, fragility, and effeminacy were valued in a woman, because a woman in this environment had a different destiny than a peasant woman.

Primitive aesthetic taste is focused not only on the convergence of beauty and usefulness, but also on the identification of certain properties of the bearer of aesthetic or artistic value and the value itself. At the same time, it is and only that which is symmetrical, geometrically correct, proportionate, proportional is considered and seems beautiful.

Art, artistic values for people of this level are significant primarily as a useful means of decoration, entertainment, recreation. The usefulness of art is also obvious when it acts as a means of ideological influence and moral education.

Thus, the aesthetic and artistic taste at the lowest level of culture is coarse and poor. Much in life is generally not appreciated aesthetically, many artistic values cannot be perceived. However, aesthetic and artistic culture is minimally realized at this level. Aesthetic perception and artistic “decoration” of life makes it, if not to a high degree, but more humane, somewhat ennobled and, at least to some extent, spiritualized.

At the next, higher level, aesthetic and artistic culture appears in all its splendor. Indeed, for people of this level, beauty turns out to be one of the highest, or even the highest value, and the sphere of aesthetic relations, the aesthetic side of anything, arouses a special specialized interest in them. This interest, as well as aesthetic and artistic taste at this level, are based on a specific development of feelings. A person of this level is usually endowed with inclinations related to the aesthetic perception of the world, aesthetic and artistic creativity, the enjoyment of art. This can be a good ear for music, a sense of rhythm, a sense of the word, the ability to fine color discrimination, a bright emotionality of nature, a strong imagination, etc. In this regard, the appearance of abilities (talents) is possible: for drawing, singing, dancing, composing music and poetry, playing musical instruments. Aesthetically, artistically gifted people often realize their inclinations and abilities. After all, they give them opportunities for self-expression in the field of aesthetic and artistic phenomena, the opportunity to experience the pleasure of beauty, of art.

A person may or may not be a professional artist, but the interest in manifestations of beauty and artistic expressiveness is serious and deep in both cases, the desire for beauty is distinct and realizable.

It can manifest itself either in arts and crafts, or in the position of a music lover, a ballet lover, an inveterate theatergoer, a serious reader.

The taste of a person of this kind is quite subtle. The pleasure received by him (and if he is an artist, then given) is so strong that it significantly outweighs the “contemptible” benefit, pushes rationality, especially ordinary rationality, into the background. A person can, as it were, “dissolve” in aesthetic contemplation, so delve into sounding music or reading a book that sometimes he forgets about everything: about time, worries, deeds. Beauty, art are valuable in themselves here and act on people of this level, elevating the soul to unearthly delight and genuine suffering. It is so powerful that people bow to beauty and artistic values as if they were sacred. Russian artist Vrubel declared: “beauty is our religion!” People who are at this level of aesthetic and artistic culture are able to die for beauty, to sacrifice themselves for the sake of art.

But they, at times, can also sacrifice others to Aphrodite and Apollo. The described level of existence of aesthetic and artistic culture is high, but not the highest. Although it is common for creators and the most passionate connoisseurs of artistic values. The limitation of this level is connected, firstly, with the most often narrow “specialization” of interests and predilections. And it's not so much that a person is specialized, let's say in love for one type or genre of art, although this happens. Highly specialized at this level is often the taste of a person. Taste, determined by predominant interest, with the emerging “blindness” or “deafness” in relation to manifestations of beauty (or artistry), which does not fit into the “band of passions”. This leads to “rejection”, rejection of “alien” aesthetic and artistic values. The aesthetic and artistic taste of a person can develop one-sidedly, being limited by a certain tradition, canons, and norms.

Or, if we are talking about the innovator (lovers of innovation), on the contrary, an absolute preference for the aesthetically or artistically new may develop, when the traditional is presented as ugly because it is traditional.

The specialized level of aesthetic culture can also be limited due to the very excessive interest in this area and the absolutization of beauty and art as values. This can lead to significant shifts, when the aesthetic attitude is actually replaced by an aesthetic one, and the inherent value of art makes it isolated from life.

The absolutization of the value of beauty leads to its opposition to other higher human values (goodness, truth), to the violation of the integrity of the field of culture.

Refined aestheticism is expressed in the fact that beauty turns out to be, mainly, a perfect form. That is, how beauty is realized and sensually experienced precisely by the form itself, and not by the organic embodiment of spirituality, meaningful humanity in it. A form that loses its connection with the spiritual and content side to such an extent that it becomes possible, as it were, “aesthetic - inverted” - the perception and presentation of the ugly, ugly as aesthetically valuable. If it does not come to this, then beauty is “divorced”, for example, from goodness, on the grounds that, in the words of one of the heroes of O. Wilde: a tiger is beautiful even when it torments an unfortunate doe.

The phrase is beautiful. But it is obviously incorrect to refer to it to justify the moral neutrality of beauty and art. As for the tiger, it certainly can be perceived as a beautiful animal, regardless of the situation. Although in itself the process of eating them fallow deer is hardly aesthetically valuable, for all its natural naturalness. But if a person (outwardly beautiful) torments another person, this is probably unaesthetic in essence, although someone can perceive what is happening with a kind of savage sensual pleasure. It is all the more doubtful that a normal person could be perceived as beautiful - an executioner crippling himself, even if the features and movements of the executioner are quite harmonious.

The second level of aesthetic and artistic culture does not exclude the possibility of the transition of the aesthetic into the aesthetic and the meaninglessness of the artistic, to which, in the end, the concepts of "art for art's sake" lead. In both cases, human sensibility is formalized to the limit, beyond which its meaningful humanization (ennoblement) disappears. And with emasculated content, the form becomes impoverished. You can pray for beauty as much as you like, but we must not forget that it is not more valuable than a person.

The already mentioned artist Vrubel believed that in art to feel deeply means: “forget that you are an artist and be glad that you are first of all a person”.

Another thing is that beauty as a value should not be subordinated to other values (for example, moral, especially political), determining in advance that only that which leads to good can be beautiful. Art should not be required to become a "textbook" of morality or a "textbook of life" or a tool in the ideological struggle. One should not make claims to artists who create aesthetic and artistic values - that they themselves would certainly be outwardly beautiful and decent in behavior. Any person, and an artist too, can be at a high level of culture in some respects, and at a low level in others. For artists, artists, writers, etc., for people in the sphere of art, the second, specialized level of aesthetic and artistic culture, with all its advantages and all its costs, is naturally the most common. Because it is not the highest level.

Only at the third, highest level of culture, the meaning of aesthetic culture is determined by the fact that the dominant human need in life is the need for another person. And then beauty, as a value, turns out to be inseparable from Good, Truth in their highest manifestations. And the point is not that Beauty can become “an outward expression, a “decoration” of the Good, or a warning radiance” of truth (W. Heisenberg). Goodness, beauty and truth are indeed inseparable, although virtue and beauty are not the same thing. Genius in art and villainy in life are quite compatible. After all, artistic value is not a genius, but his work. In life, even the vicious can look beautiful, because vice, generally speaking, is not anti-human. But vileness, meanness, betrayal, denunciation, cruelty are essentially anesthetic, they are ugly. And an aesthetically cultured person feels this, feeling disgust for the evil that alienates a person from humanity, opposes it. They say that this is a moral feeling, and one can agree with this. But it is also aesthetic. Both for top level culture is indistinguishable, or almost indistinguishable.

Where there is no beauty, goodness is not fully realized, and if it is realized, then it is somewhat strained. Where there is evil, the realization of beauty is incomplete, flawed in some moments. A truly good intention, a good deed are quite good if they are beautiful and can be experienced as joy (for oneself and for another). It is important, however, that there be the possibility of aesthetic (and not aesthetic) perception.

Aesthetic pleasure is fully as the highest human joy, as a celebration of the spirit. Beauty for a person of a full-fledged aesthetic culture is a diverse (in terms of carriers, forms, types) sensual expression of a person’s humanity in general, including goodness and the truth of life. Such a person has a subtle aesthetic and artistic taste, the ability to distinguish nuances, shades of beauty and ugliness in life and in art. He is capable of deep empathy, sympathy. Its taste is individualized, not limited by traditions, specialized preferences, canons and rules.

Page 9 of 25

The beautiful as a universal value.

So, beauty is born by the natural properties of the object, but only correlated in the process of social practice with the spiritual needs of the individual, which are determined by the level of development of society. It is objective, since it does not depend on the perception of this or that individual, but on the real value of the object for humanity. It is subjective, because it satisfies the aesthetic needs of specific people and puts the object in a certain relation to the subject. In addition, this aesthetic property is social, as it is determined by historical patterns.

Thus, the beautiful is the broadest positive social significance of the phenomenon, its positive value for humanity as a species.

The beautiful is the “spirituality” of an object. But spirituality, caused not by God, but by the individual and society. Social practice has turned nature into an inorganic body and left the mark of a spiritual image modern man on objects of the outside world; practice has turned this world into a real embodiment of human essential forces.

Beauty is the realm of man. The beautiful is a known, mastered phenomenon. It does not contain anything frightening, repulsive: a person has mastered it and in relation to it he is free. It is important to remember that we are not talking about personal dominance over the phenomenon, but about the domination of man as a representative of the human race, about domination due to the development of society.

Beauty in public life is the sphere of political and social freedom, in nature it is the sphere of free possession of an object (the ability to recognize, master, create, manufacture it), in art it is the sphere of free possession of skill, as in sports.

Beauty is a historical product. Phenomena of reality, in which the maximum dominance of man over the surrounding material world for a given level of historical development of society is manifested, appear as beautiful. Free possession of the forces of nature, the ability to subordinate them to the laws and properties of a reasonable practical goal cause a high aesthetic pleasure in a person.

Often natural phenomena seem beautiful due to the fact that social content is attached to them. As a sign of social relations, flowers, animals, trees, mountains can act - in principle, all natural phenomena. And they act in this capacity only when the social content assigned to them becomes the goal of perception.

When an object becomes beautiful due to its social properties (social content), its structural features are of no fundamental importance. Two elementary examples illustrate this conclusion well. For any of our schoolchildren, the number “5” is more beautiful than the number “2”, and the reason for this, obviously, is by no means the structural features of these numbers. For an artist, a hall that exploded with applause is beautiful. But applause is a manifestation of structurelessness. Applause gives pleasure to the artist only because it testifies to the harmony he has achieved with the audience. Such facts give some scholars grounds for asserting that not everything beautiful is harmonious. But it's not. And the five, and applause, and much more are just signs of goals, human needs, the result of an agreement.

In art, structureless signs, however, are not used. Artistic signs (allegory, symbol) take, as a rule, a harmonious form.

This characterizes the nature and essence of beauty as a key aesthetic category. Obviously, the aesthetic properties of natural phenomena and social life are not fundamentally different. In both cases, aesthetic properties have an objective-material, social essence. And in any case, this essence is spiritualized by the subject. This is the essence of the monistic solution to the problem of beauty in modern aesthetics.

public value. The beauty. Basic aesthetic categories. What is beauty the beautiful as a value of culture