Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:42:17.182Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Intuition of Time Between Science and Art History in the Early Twentieth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Gabriel Motzkin
Gabriel Motzkin*
Affiliation:
History Department The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

The argument

This article compares the corresponding effects in science and art of a change in the intuition of time at the beginning of this century. McTaggart's distinction between linear time and tense time is applied to the question of whether linear perspective requires a notion of time as succession. It is argued that the problem of self-representation is a basic problem for this kind of uniform space-time because of the contradiction between this model's need for a privileged point of view and its simultaneous denial of such a possibility.

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , Spring 1997 , pp. 207 - 220
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bethea, David M.. 1989. The Shape of Apocalypse in Modern Russian Fiction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cassedy, Steven. 1990. Flight from Eden. The Origins of Modern Literary Criticism and Theory. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Damisch, Hubert. 1987. L 'Origine de la perspective. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
Edgerton, Samuel Y. Jr., 1991. The Heritage of Giotto's Geometry. Art and Science on the Eve of the Scientific Revolution. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Florenskij, Pavel. 1989. Die umgekehrte Perspektive. Texte zur Kunst. Munich: Mathes & Seitz.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. [1966] 1973. The Order of Things. An Archeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Random House. Originally published as Les mots et les choses. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1966. Truth and Method, translated by Buranand, Garrett and Canning, John. New York: Seabury Press. Originally published as Wahrheit und Methode. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin. 1927. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Holly, Michael Ann. 1984. Panofsky and the Foundations of Art History, 130–57. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Holly, Michael Ann. 1972. “Der Zeitbegriff in der Geschichtswissenschaft,” in Frühe Schriften. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Kolstermann.Google Scholar
Horwich, Paul. 1987 Asymmetries in Time. Problems in the Philosophy of Science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Husserl, Edmund. [1966] 1991. On the Phenomenology of the Consciousness of Internal Time (1893–1917), translated by Brough, John Barnett. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Originally published as Zur Phänomenologie des inneren Zeitbewusstseins, ed. Boehm, Rudolf, in Husserliana X. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Ingarden, Roman. [1968] 1973. The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art, translated by Crowley, Ruth Ann and Olson, Kenneth R.. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press. Originally published as Vom Erkennen des literarischen Kunstwerks. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Kemp, Martin. 1990. The Science of Art. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Kubovy, Michael. 1986. The Psychology of Perspective and Renaissance Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McTaggart, J. McT. E. 1927. The Nature of Existence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. 1991. Perspective as Symbolic Form. Translated by Wood, Christopher S.. New York: Zone Books. Originally published as “Die Perspektive als ‘symbolische Form’,” Vorträge der Bibliothek Warburg, hrsg. von Fritz Saxl. 1924–1925. Leipzig & Berlin: B. G. Teubner. Italian translation by Enrico Filipini: “La prospettiva come ‘forma symbolica’,” in: La prospettiva come “forma symbolica,” 37–117. Milan: Feltrinelli, 1984, 1990.Google Scholar
Sorabji, Richard. 1983. Time, Creation and the Continuum: Theories in Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Yourgrau, Palle. 1991. The Disappearance of Time. Kurt Gödel and the Disappearance of the Idealistic Tradition in Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar