"Literature and knowledge"@en . "Literature and knowledge"@en . "Literatura a pozn\u00E1n\u00ED"@cs . "26365" . "CZ - \u010Cesk\u00E1 republika" . . "Literatura a pozn\u00E1n\u00ED" . . "1" . . . . "1"^^ . . . "1"^^ . "Literatura a pozn\u00E1n\u00ED"@cs . "1803-7445" . "61" . "8"^^ . . "RIV/00216224:14210/14:00075774!RIV15-MSM-14210___" . "http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/130020" . "literature; knowledge; cognitivism; Stolnitz; Graham"@en . "The goal of the paper is to reconsider two incompatible stances on a possible cognitive gain from belles-lettres stories. Cognitivism is based on the fundamental state that a value of work of art is proportional to the degree of knowledge it brings. It is presupposed that a reader\u00B4s mental state before reading such stories is, in a way, poorer then thereafter. What kind of properties does such cognitive gain have? Is it a moral piece of knowledge? Or is it a piece of knowledge at all? A role of truth is mentioned. Two pros et cons arguments \u2013 namely Graham's (argument about the cognitive value of the arts) and Stolnitz's ones (argument about cognitive triviality of art) \u2013 are briefly examined. In the last part, a natural view of a literary cognitive gain is offered."@en . . "Literatura a pozn\u00E1n\u00ED" . . "RIV/00216224:14210/14:00075774" . "[73633D01DC33]" . "S" . "14210" . "C\u00EDlem studie je porovn\u00E1n\u00ED dvou protich\u016Fdn\u00FDch stanovisek o mo\u017Enosti literatury jako zdroje pozn\u00E1n\u00ED. Kognitivismus hovo\u0159\u00ED o hodnot\u011B um\u011Bleck\u00E9ho d\u00EDla v p\u0159\u00EDm\u00E9 \u00FAm\u011B\u0159e k m\u00ED\u0159e pozn\u00E1n\u00ED, kterou p\u0159in\u00E1\u0161\u00ED. Jak\u00FD druh nov\u00E9 znalosti v\u0161ak mohou liter\u00E1rn\u00ED d\u00EDla poskytnout? P\u0159edstavujeme kr\u00E1tce dva kl\u00ED\u010Dov\u00E9 argumenty tohoto sporu \u2013 Graham\u016Fv o kognitivn\u00ED hodnot\u011B um\u011Bn\u00ED a Stolnitz\u016Fv o kognitivn\u00ED trivialit\u011B um\u011Bn\u00ED." . . . "\u0158ehulkov\u00E1, Hana" . . . "Studia philosophica" . "C\u00EDlem studie je porovn\u00E1n\u00ED dvou protich\u016Fdn\u00FDch stanovisek o mo\u017Enosti literatury jako zdroje pozn\u00E1n\u00ED. Kognitivismus hovo\u0159\u00ED o hodnot\u011B um\u011Bleck\u00E9ho d\u00EDla v p\u0159\u00EDm\u00E9 \u00FAm\u011B\u0159e k m\u00ED\u0159e pozn\u00E1n\u00ED, kterou p\u0159in\u00E1\u0161\u00ED. Jak\u00FD druh nov\u00E9 znalosti v\u0161ak mohou liter\u00E1rn\u00ED d\u00EDla poskytnout? P\u0159edstavujeme kr\u00E1tce dva kl\u00ED\u010Dov\u00E9 argumenty tohoto sporu \u2013 Graham\u016Fv o kognitivn\u00ED hodnot\u011B um\u011Bn\u00ED a Stolnitz\u016Fv o kognitivn\u00ED trivialit\u011B um\u011Bn\u00ED."@cs . . .