Research On The Theory Of Aesthetic Pleasure Of Stephen Davis

Aesthetic pleasure has always been an important issue in aesthetics research.Different theorists often emphasize and pursue their spiritual attributes,perceptual qualities,and phenomenological characteristics.Stephen Davis,a famous New Zealand esthetician,took a different approach,placing aesthetic pleasure under the perspective of the theory of evolution,and rediscovering its origin,characteristics and value.His evolutionary vision has important enlightening significance for enriching the connotation of aesthetic pleasure,resolving the contradiction between aesthetic universality and particularity,and reconsidering the value of contemporary art and popular culture,and therefore has a high level of research value.This thesis is divided into four chapters.The first chapter mainly elaborates the theoretical background of Davis’ aesthetic pleasure theory.It specifically analyzes Davis’s inheritance,development and transcendence of Darwin’s evolutionary aesthetics,Santayana’s naturalistic aesthetics and Dewey’s empirical aesthetics.First of all,Davis criticized and inherited the viewpoint that animals have aesthetic consciousness put forward by Darwin’s evolutionary aesthetics,thinking that only such advanced animals as humans have aesthetic consciousness.Secondly,Davis was deeply influenced by Santayana’s "functional theory" and expanded his understanding of the function of aesthetic pleasure.In the end,Davis also drew lessons from Dewey’s empirical aesthetics and emphasized the important role of proximal pleasure,which laid a deep theoretical foundation for the generation of his own theory.The second chapter mainly elaborates the core viewpoints of Davis’ aesthetic pleasure theory from three aspects.First,in terms of origin,Davis believes that aesthetic pleasure comes from the pursuit of genetic benefits.By studying humans’aesthetics of animals,landscapes,and themselves,Davis has determined that aesthetic awareness is unique to humans,manifested in mate selection being generally the optimal genetic selection.Second,in terms of characteristics,Davis believes that aesthetic pleasure is a kind of utilitarian pleasure.It is not a "contemplative"response,but an "attention" one.At the same time,it is not only perceptual and directly-given pleasure,but also a comprehensive pleasure that includes all the senses.Third,in terms of function,Davis holds that aesthetic pleasure is "function of beauty" rather than "the combination of beauty and function".The third chapter analyzes the distinctive tendencies and characteristics of Davis’ aesthetic pleasure theory.Its characteristics can be broadly summarized in three aspects:First,the demand for "de-moralization" of aesthetic pleasure.Davis believes that aesthetic pleasure should not be measured by moral standards and cognitive standpoints,but should maintain the characteristics of its unconscious and spontaneous response.Second,the tendency of“de-elitism”in the value standpoint,rethinking the traditional proposition of no utilitarian aesthetics.Third,in terms of the tendency of "de-absolutization" in aesthetic topics,Davis discusses many aesthetic propositions related to aesthetic pleasure,affirms the creativity of some viewpoints,points out the possible problems of these viewpoints,and actively looks for solutions to the problems.This rigorous research attitude reflects the openness of his theory.The fourth chapter mainly explains the value and limitations of Davis’ aesthetic pleasure theory.In terms of value,Davis not only confirmed the perceptual,natural and unconscious dimensions of aesthetic pleasure from the perspective of evolution,and enhanced the value of sensory aesthetics,but also made an evolutionary interpretation of the universality of aesthetics and expanded the universality of aesthetics.The connotation,and these thesis also provide a new perspective for rethinking contemporary popular culture.In terms of limitations,Davis’ theory of aesthetic pleasure has two main shortcomings.For one thing,when he discusses the content of aesthetic pleasure,he has a tendency to dualistically oppose the relationship between culture and evolution,which makes him deliberately avoid some problems.For another thing,his explanation of evolution relies too much on the theory of sexual selection,and ignores the related issues of individual survival,which leads to some art forms breaking away from the basis of evolution,showing a certain narrow definition of evolution.