Summary
Having become acquainted with the article by Ya. E. Elsberg "Scholastic Concepts", published as a discussion in issue 1 of the journal "Questions of Philosophy" of the current year, the reader cannot help but ask: what, exactly, did the author want to prove with this article? What general epistemological and special aesthetic position does the author of the article take? The article is directed against the "scholastic concepts" of L. N. Stolovich in his new book "Aesthetics in Reality and in Art" (Gospolitizdat, 1959). It goes without saying that there is nothing unacceptable or incorrect in the fact that one Soviet author discusses with another author such an extremely important general epistemological and special aesthetic question. However, from what positions does Ya. E. Elsberg lead this discussion? From what positions does he criticize the "scholastic concepts" of his opponents, in this case L. N. Stolovich? At the very beginning of the article, Ya. E. Elsberg himself gives a fairly clear answer to these questions. Criticizing L. N. Stolovich's book, Elsberg points out first and foremost that L. N. Stolovich transforms aesthetic categories (beautiful, sublime, disgusting, tragic, comic, etc.) into "elements" of reality itself. Below, Ya. E. Elsberg writes: "Of course, it is good that L. N. Stolovich seeks the source (my interpretation - T. P.) of the aesthetic in objective reality, but what is bad is that he mechanically transfers the categories of aesthetics into reality, identifying these categories with the properties of the latter." And even further down, allegedly referring to Chernyshevsky, the author again states: "Yes, the tragic, the comic, the beautiful are contained in life itself, and in it are the roots (my exp. - T. P.) of the corresponding phenomena of art and of aesthetic categories. But to reduce life to them means to pay a tribute to scholastic systematics" ("Questions of Philosophy", No. 1, 1961, pp. 114, 115, etc., my exp. - T. P.).