The submitted article reconstructs the interactions between Richard
Nikolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi as the originator of the Pan-Europe idea, and the Prague newspaper Prager Presse, during the time from August 1921 until autumn 1926. The account notes and comments not only upon Coudenhove-Kalergi writings published in the paper, but also the reviews of his books and reports on his public appearances. Thus the article traces, how the philosopher, who comes up with a particular interpretation of the situation in Europe after the World War I, becomes a leader of the international movement, a politician and a diplomat striving to gain support for a specific model of European organisation. The final section of this article deals with how the Czech translation of Coudenhove’s book Pan-Europa originated and the circumstances it was accompanied by. and Článek zahrnuje poznámkový aparát pod čarou
Text se zaměřuje na při jetí a vnímání darwinismu v českých zemích v 19. století, kdy bylo šíření a interpretace Darwinova učení paradoxně spjato s dvěma profesory estetiky z Karlo-Ferdinandovy un verzity v Praze, Josefem Durdíkem a Otakarem Hostinským. Ačkoliv poněkud zjednodušovali teorii přírodního výběru, Darwinovu teorii chápali jako příchod nového paradigmatu (na rozdíl od tehdejších biologů působících v Čechách). Tento text představuje a srovnává interpretaci darwinismu u obou estetiků, zejména jejich stanoviska k teorii přírodního výběru, možnostem aplikace této teorie v estetice a teorii umění, a také jejich vztah k Darwinově
výkladu estetických jevů v přírodě. Jako dodatek následuje krátké vyzdvižení Darwinova učení v textech dalších českých estetiků (Tyrš, Klácel, Volek)., The text is focused on the acceptance and perception of
Darwinism in 19th-century Bohemia, when the diffusion and interpretation of Darwin’s teachings were paradoxical connected with two professors of aesthetics from Charles-Ferdinand University in Prague, Josef Durdík and Otakar Hostinský. Although they somewhat simplified the theory of natural selection, they understood Darwin’s theory to be the arrival of a new paradigm (in contrast to contemporary biologists working in the Czech lands). This text presents and compares both aestheticians’ interpretations of Darwinism, mainly their stance on the theory of natural selection, the possibilities for applying this theory to aesthetics and art theory, as well as their relationship to Darwin’s interpretation of aesthetic phenomena in nature. As a supplement, a short emphasis on Darwin’s teaching in texts of other Czech aesteticians (Tyrš, Klácel, Vol ek) follows., and Karel Stibral.
The study investigates the conception of science and study in the inaugural lecture of the Prague professor of aesthetics, Joseph Georg Meinert, delivered in 1806. It shows that its hidden source of ideas was the inaugural lecture of Friedrich Schiller delivered in Jena in 1789. Meinert, as a civil servant, was not able to give a direct presentation of Schiller’s ideas because they were in conflict with the national curriculum of philosophical studies. Meinert therefore chose legerdemain in putting forward Schiller’s ideas in a form that was acceptable to the Viennese court. The study describes the steps that he took to this end.
This essay aims to describe hitherto unknown notes of aesthetics lectures given by August Gottlieb Meißner (1753-1807) at Prague University. It compares these notes (made by a certain Wagner, and deposited in the Wienbibliothek im Rathaus) with notes deposited in Czech libraries, and seeks to determine their place chronologically amongst notes made by others attending Meißner’s lectures over the years. The most important difference in content between the earlier known notes and Wagner’s is Meißner’s negative attitude towards the Schlegel brothers. This attitude slightly alters our existing notion of his views on the relationship between literature and morality. Taken alone, the collections of notes in Czech libraries had led one to conclude that this Prague ordinarius was an ardent libertine, who dared, even at a conservative Austrian university, to push for the autonomy of art, including a thorough split between art and morality, regarding not only works of art, but also, to a certain extent, the artists themselves. By contrast, the Vienna MS as a matter of priority restricts this split to art, and limits it to the higher, moral aims of the artist as citizen. His approach to questions of morality and to the Schlegel brothers demonstrates that while Meißner considered himself part of the liberally enlightened current of contemporaneous literature, which made moving the emotions the central aim of art, he was no longer an adherent of upandcoming Romanticism with its extreme conviction about unlimited authorial liberty, which stemmed from the philosophical Idealism of the times. This attitude to the Schlegel brothers also suggests that Wagner attended Meißner’s lectures in aesthetics and rhetoric in the winter of 1800/1., Tomáš Hlobil., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
This article deals with the proposal, by the early-Wittgenstein, that we avoid antinomies by excluding talk about talk. Given that such a policy is in its very character controversial, we consider whether antimonies might not be better dealt with by a shift from the sphere of epistemology to that of aesthetics. To this end we develop some of the principles of Wittgensteinian aesthetics, taking in the whole of Wittgenstein’s work, both early and late, and its roots in German idealism. Key themes are an analogy between Hegel’s and Wittgenstein’s (later) approach to contradiction, and an analysis of Hegel’s thesis according to which beauty is the sensuous manifestation of truth. and Der Artikel befasst sich mit dem Vorschlag des frühen Wittgenstein, Antinomien durch ein Verbot des Sprechens über die Sprache zu vermeiden. In Anbetracht dessen, dass ein solches Verbot von seinem Wesen her ebenfalls strittig ist, wird die Möglichkeit in Erwägung gezogen, ob Antinomien nicht adäquater durch einen Übergang vom epistemischen in den ästhetischen Bereich angegangen werden konnten. Zu diesem Zweck werden im Kontext des Gesamtwerks Wittgensteins, d. h. sowohl des
Früh- als auch des Spätwerks, sowie hinsichtlich von Wittgensteins Wurzeln im deutschen Idealismus, bestimmte Grundsatze der Ästhetik Wittgensteins entwickelt. Dabei zeigt sich die entscheidende Bedeutung der Analogie der Ansätze Hegels und des (späteren) Wittgensteins hinsichtlich dieser Streitfrage sowie die Analyse der These Hegels, der gemäß die Schönheit die Sinnesmanifestation der Wahrheit ist.
Text představuje pojmy estetiky, které se tak či onak váží k pojetí oboru jako teorie umělecké kritiky. Snahou o argumentaci chce být text řazen do širokého proudu analytické estetiky. Metodou je jednak výklad věcných či historických souvislostí – to platí pro pojmy tradiční, jednak analýza pojmů – těch, které byly jako odborné termíny zavedeny relativně nedávno. Protože charakteristickým rysem analytické estetiky je kontrolovatelné uvažování o dané věci, je v první kapitole vyložen pojem argument. ,The text introduces some concepts which are related, in a way, to the conception of Aesthetics as the theory of art criticism. Through a publicly accessible form of writing, namely argumentation, the text can be catergorized as part of the wide stream of analytical Aesthetics. The writing method has two aspects: an explication of facts on the one hand, an analysis on the other. Many structured considerations appear as the text moves along, and that is why the whole is opened with a short explanation of the concept of argument.