Nara Women's University Digital I Title 京都学派と美的人間形成論 : 木村素衞は如何にシラーを読んだのか Author(s) 西村, 拓生 Citation 西村拓生 : 奈良女子大学文学部研究教育年報, 第 5 号, pp. 83- Issue Date 2008-12-31 Description URL http://hdl.handle.net/10935/3097 Textversionpublisher This document is downloaded http://nwudir.lib.nara-w.ac.jp/dspace
97 The Kyoto School and Theory of Aesthetic Human Transformation; How did Kimura Motomori interpret F. Schiller? NISHIMURA Takuo The purpose of this paper is to introduce a typical theory of human education, or rather transformation, of the Kyoto school of philosophy and examine its relevance for our current philosophy of education. For this purpose I have taken up Kimura Motomori's interpretation of F. Schiller's theory of aesthetic education. Kimura was a leading student of Nishida Kitaro, began with a study of Fichte and was very interested in aesthetics, but turned to the philosophy of education when he became the chair of pedagogy at Kyoto Imperial University in 1933. The reason why I take up Kimura's interpretation of Schiller is the fact that there are multiple possibilities for interpreting Schiller's "Uber die asthetische Erziehung des Menschen in einer Reihe von Briefen". This text is famous for being difficult to understand. The range of interpretations by many thinkers and scholars is so broad that some completely oppose one another. How a thinker approaches the aporia of this text becomes a touchstone for revealing his estimation of "the aesthetic". This is no exception in the case of Kimura. When he discussed the significance of arts for human life, which he characterized with the Buddhist term "moksha" ("gedatsu" in Japanese), he took up Schiller's concept of "schone Seele" as a representative example. His interpretation is quite characteristic of the Kyoto school. Through examination of the interpretation, I would like to present the characteristics of the school. To sum up, Kimura considered Kantian "disinterestedness and non-conceptuality" to be purity of "pure feeling" in Nishida's sense, "purity" to be realized by "negation-transcendence" towards "the Inner" or "the Bottom", and he therefore interpreted Schiller's "Spiel" and "schone Seele" to mean being in the "locus" ("basho" in Japanese) as "absolute nothingness". And if the aesthetic state that is called "Spiel" and "schone Seele" by Schiller corresponds to such "nothingness" as "negation-transcendence", the question of whether the aesthetic state is "process" or "aim" becomes meaningless because it "embracestranscends" and "absolutely affirms" everything. From the Kimura-Nishida viewpoint there is no contradiction or "refraction" in Schiller's argument.