{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018815331010452963, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003832752613240418, 'mean_word_length': 5.254901960784314, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Aesthetics and Bildung

Understanding and misunderstandings between groups and individuals should be seen as one of the ‘grand challenges’ today,1 since it affects domestic violence, social equality, and aggression between states. One aspect of this problem is the willingness or lack of it to approach other persons or groups as worthy of understanding. Whether willfully or not, lack of understanding contributes to violence, aggression, fear, and unhappiness, and may become a hindrance to finding and implementing solutions to crises. Understanding other individuals and groups is however also about understanding oneself. The role of the arts in processes of understanding both oneself and others has been recognized in the philosophy and theory of art from ancient times until today. Yet in contemporary policy discussions, the instrumental value of the arts in promoting health, learning, or economical growth2 is much more strongly on the agenda than the hermeneutic and aesthetic power of the arts in articulating the human condition. My contribution to this issue of Diogenes is situated at the junction of aesthetics and education, which is also a junction for aesthetics and ethics and art and politics. I want to revive the notion of education as Bildung, which is far more hermeneutically fruitful than a view of education as merely teaching, training, or schooling (Biesta 2006; Prange 2004). I suggest that Bildung be understood as a social and dialogic process where human relationships are crucial not just for the exchange but also for the birth of insights. One central point in the following is thus to move the emphasis in Bildung from the individual towards the social sphere.3 The second emphasis is aesthetic. Whereas classical views of Bildung focused on the formation of a beautiful soul, I stress the role of images (Bilde, broadly understood) as intermediaries and points of reference in expressing, communicating, and negotiating cultural values. According to this interpretation, the process of Bildung is not primarily about becoming a civilized person, but about engaging with the human condition with the help of what I shall refer to as Bild/images. The educational perspective highlights certain dimensions of aesthetics: especially the social processes of making and appreciating art. The arts are an important field of cultural creation; and aesthetic means are central in affirming, transforming, and sometimes betraying cultural and existential values. Through my examples I show that the power of art to communicate and make real a sense of shared humanity is still a topical and fruitful resource. But alongside this, art often implicates a strong articulation and affirmation of singularity and difference; one that allows and even invites differences in background, perspectives, experiences, and worldviews of its audience to