质疑将圣物作为艺术加以虐待(efacts)

IF 0.2 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
A. D. Attoe, M. Enyimba
{"title":"质疑将圣物作为艺术加以虐待(efacts)","authors":"A. D. Attoe, M. Enyimba","doi":"10.1080/02580136.2021.1996140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we argue against the assumptions that allow for the exploitation of certain types of relics under the guise that these objects are merely artistic and/or artifactual. Our thesis, therefore, is that sacred objects cannot be counted as art or treated as artefacts. To buttress our point, we first present some understandings of art and show how they aid these misconceptions. We then zoom in on two instances where the assumptions we refer to are at play. Specifically, we talk about certain objects with spiritual significance, and human bodies that are inherently sacred as examples that buttress our point. We show that the cultural and spiritual/religious significance that these sacred objects have do not make them artworks, and that the sacredness and the right to dignity that corpses possess are good enough reasons to reject the intuitions that make us believe they can become artefacts or can be treated as such.","PeriodicalId":44834,"journal":{"name":"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY","volume":"15 1","pages":"337 - 349"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interrogating the mistreatment of sacred objects as art(efacts)\",\"authors\":\"A. D. Attoe, M. Enyimba\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02580136.2021.1996140\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, we argue against the assumptions that allow for the exploitation of certain types of relics under the guise that these objects are merely artistic and/or artifactual. Our thesis, therefore, is that sacred objects cannot be counted as art or treated as artefacts. To buttress our point, we first present some understandings of art and show how they aid these misconceptions. We then zoom in on two instances where the assumptions we refer to are at play. Specifically, we talk about certain objects with spiritual significance, and human bodies that are inherently sacred as examples that buttress our point. We show that the cultural and spiritual/religious significance that these sacred objects have do not make them artworks, and that the sacredness and the right to dignity that corpses possess are good enough reasons to reject the intuitions that make us believe they can become artefacts or can be treated as such.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44834,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"337 - 349\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2021.1996140\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2021.1996140","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,我们反对这样的假设,即允许在这些物品仅仅是艺术和/或人工制品的幌子下开发某些类型的文物。因此,我们的论点是,圣物不能算作艺术或被视为人工制品。为了支持我们的观点,我们首先提出一些对艺术的理解,并说明它们是如何帮助这些误解的。然后我们放大两个例子,其中我们提到的假设正在发挥作用。具体来说,我们谈论某些具有精神意义的物体,以及内在神圣的人体,作为支持我们观点的例子。我们表明,这些圣物所具有的文化和精神/宗教意义并不能使它们成为艺术品,而尸体所拥有的神圣性和尊严权足以让我们拒绝那些让我们相信它们可以成为人工制品或可以被视为人工制品的直觉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Interrogating the mistreatment of sacred objects as art(efacts)
In this article, we argue against the assumptions that allow for the exploitation of certain types of relics under the guise that these objects are merely artistic and/or artifactual. Our thesis, therefore, is that sacred objects cannot be counted as art or treated as artefacts. To buttress our point, we first present some understandings of art and show how they aid these misconceptions. We then zoom in on two instances where the assumptions we refer to are at play. Specifically, we talk about certain objects with spiritual significance, and human bodies that are inherently sacred as examples that buttress our point. We show that the cultural and spiritual/religious significance that these sacred objects have do not make them artworks, and that the sacredness and the right to dignity that corpses possess are good enough reasons to reject the intuitions that make us believe they can become artefacts or can be treated as such.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The South African Journal of Philosophy (SAJP) is the official publication of the Philosophical Society of South Africa. The aim of the journal is to publish original scholarly contributions in all areas of philosophy at an international standard. Contributions are double-blind peer-reviewed and include articles, discussions of articles previously published, review articles and book reviews. The wide scope of the South African Journal of Philosophy makes it the continent''s central vehicle for the publication of general philosophical work. The journal is accredited with the South African Department of Higher Education and Training.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信