“Abstraction,
Empathy, and Humanization in Art Education through the ders
BELGELİĞİ Model”
Introduction
Art education is not merely a domain for acquiring technical skills;
it is a profound intellectual journey accompanying the individual’s
process of becoming human. Within this context, the ders
BELGELİĞİ (Course Documentation) model approaches art
production not simply as an outcome-oriented act, but as an
expression of a meaningful relationship between the individual,
themselves, their environment, and the universe. The model
emphasizes that students do not merely produce objects but develop a stance toward
their own artistic processes. At this juncture, Wilhelm Worringer’s
concepts of abstraction and empathy provide a strong foundation to
enrich the theoretical framework of the Ders
Belgeliği model. According to Worringer, formal tendencies in
art history are not mere aesthetic preferences but responses to
existential human needs. This understanding raises a fundamental
question guiding art education: Does the individual realize
themselves through abstraction or through empathy during the
creative process? The Ders Belgeliği model
freely navigates this dialectic, allowing space for the student’s
own expression, intuition, and intellectual stance. Consequently,
the model is not only a pedagogical tool but also an ethical and
existential proposition. This paper discusses how the Ders
Belgeliği model aligns with the humanization process, shapes
the capacity to take a stance, and gains a deeper conceptual
framework within the context of Worringer’s aesthetic anthropology.
1. Definition and Philosophical
Foundation of the Ders
Belgeliği Model
The Ders Belgeliği model emerges as an original pedagogical
approach in contemporary art education. It enables students to
rediscover both their perception of the world and their inner
existence through art. At its core lies a pedagogical
reinterpretation of Wilhelm Worringer’s aesthetic dichotomy:
abstraction and empathy. For Worringer, these two fundamental
artistic tendencies manifest differently across historical and
cultural contexts. In Ders Belgeliği, however,
they operate simultaneously and complementarily within the student’s
artistic production. Empathy here is not mere imitation or blind
copying but a conscious practice of carefully observing objects to
understand their structures, forms, and relationships. This stage
represents the student’s deliberate engagement with external reality
and the formation of a connection with the world. Abstraction, on
the other hand, refers to the act of selection, elimination, and
reconfiguration derived from observed reality. At this phase, the
student transcends the boundaries of observation to create original
form and content.
The pedagogical dialectic between these two processes contributes to
the student’s humanization. Integrating Takiyettin Mengüşoğlu’s
philosophy further enriches the model’s uniqueness and depth.
Mengüşoğlu emphasizes that humanity arises from the “courage
to rely on one’s own reason” and the “ability
to take a stance.” Similarly, the Ders
Belgeliği model offers students the opportunity not just to
imitate but to develop their authentic stance, transforming art
education into an existential journey. Hence, Ders
Belgeliği is more than a technical method; it is a pedagogical
system supporting the student to see with their own eyes, think with
their own mind, and construct their humanity in the process. The
student’s selective and eliminative acts become a conscious and
authentic practice of reinterpreting the world, while the empathy
stage serves as a solid foundation for this meaning-making.
Ultimately, the concept of “seeing with one’s own eyes,” a
fundamental aim of the Ders Belgeliği model,
is reinforced by questioning the student’s mode of seeing, directing
them to their essence through selection and elimination, and
reconfiguring aesthetic language. The documentation practice
concretizes this transformation, enabling the tracking and
evaluation of individual development in art education.
The dialectical relationship among the Ders Belgeliği model,
Worringer, and Mengüşoğlu’s ideas will be examined in detail in the
following sections, revealing the pedagogical and philosophical
depth of the model.
2. From Worringer to Pedagogical Dialectics:
Redefining Empathy and Abstraction
The Ders Belgeliği model transforms Worringer’s aesthetic
dichotomy of abstraction and empathy into a pedagogical tool, deeply
involving the student in the artistic production process. Here,
abstraction is not merely a formal escape but a mental encounter
that enables “seeing with one’s own eyes,” reaching
the essence of the object through “selection
and elimination.” Empathy is not blind imitation or
superficial copying; it evolves into a conscious practice of forming
a relationship with the object, recognizing underlying connections,
comparing different productions, and responding thoughtfully.
During studio work, the student initially engages in empathy by
observing real objects and acquiring structural and formal knowledge—for
instance, carefully observing proportions, lines, and volumes while
drawing a bust. This goes beyond mere visual replication; the
student consciously understands the object’s depth through
structural observation. In the subsequent abstraction phase, the
student deliberately breaks down this structural knowledge,
rearranges it, and creates their own aesthetic principles. This
process surpasses Worringer’s aesthetic dichotomy, becoming a
humanization practice where the student takes a stance toward the
world.
Documentation makes this pedagogical dialectic visible. The student
records observations, choices, and intellectual notes from both
empathy and abstraction phases. These records prompt reflection on
how the student sees and thinks, mapping the pedagogical journey—revealing
when they lean toward imitation or abstraction. Ultimately, the
model aims for the student to free themselves from external
reality’s pressure, begin crafting the rules of their own inner
world, find their unique voice, and develop humanization and the
ability to take a stance.
This pedagogical dialectic represents an original approach that
transforms theory into practice, turning the student into an active
thinker and creator.
3. Student Experiences and Studio Practices: The
Humanization Journey from Imitation to Abstraction
Perhaps the most striking aspect of the Ders Belgeliği model
is how abstract theories manifest concretely in the student’s inner
world and creative practice. The model transcends classical art
education frameworks by making visible a multi-layered process in
which the student is not merely a producer but also an observer,
decision-maker, and subject. This visibility unfolds not only in the
final product but also at every step, choice, hesitation, and
intuitive inclination.
3.1 Beyond Empathy and Observation: Moments of
Intuitive Breakthrough
The student’s first step in studio practice typically begins with
imitation. However, this is not a mere formal repetition but an
analytical effort to understand “why it is so” in
the existing work. Students may start by observing nature or
interpreting a contemporary artwork. This initial encounter is
shaped by the unconscious; even the first lines reveal intuitive
preferences unknown to the student. At this stage, the student
operates within Worringer’s empathy tendency—meeting an external
form with their inner world, sometimes experiencing harmony,
sometimes conflict. For example, a student drawing a tree trunk
might depict it as curving upwards instead of straight—a
psychological, not just visual, interpretation. Such intuitive
breaks mark thresholds toward abstraction.
3.2 Reflective Documentation: Moments of Decision and
Stance
Documentation forms the unique backbone of the Ders Belgeliği model.
It is not only an archive of the student’s drawings but also a
testimony to their orientations, hesitations, aesthetic choices, and
even intuitive fears. This enables asking questions such as, “Why
did you leave this area blank?”, “Why did you
sharpen this line?”, or “What are you hiding here?” For
example, when tracing a student’s process from drawing a realistic
chair to abstract forms, the legs might shift from clearly depicted
in the first study to simple inclined lines in the third, while the
seat becomes a circular void. This formal transformation visually
expresses the student’s subjectification process. These documents
reveal how a stance develops, how a position forms, and most
importantly, how the student confronts their inner reality.
Documentation thus becomes a practical tool for the student’s
courage to rely on their reason and intuition, as Mengüşoğlu
emphasizes.
3.3 Transition to Abstraction: From Form to Stance
Abstraction typically emerges in a moment of rupture. The student
ceases to directly represent the object and instead seeks to
reconstruct its spirit, rhythm, or trace. Lines soften, spaces
increase, and boundaries blur. Form gives way to stance. This
tendency aligns with Worringer’s abstraction and represents not only
an aesthetic but also an ethical decision. The student begins to
represent not what is but what ought to be.
This shift reveals that art is not merely expression but a domain of
stance. It signals that the student has become not only an art
producer but also a stance-developer regarding their existence. For
instance, a student drawing a chair might eventually remove the
chair entirely, leaving only an unoccupied trace—an act of meaning-making
through absence. This is philosophical abstraction transformed into
an aesthetic language.
3.4 Visual Traces of Humanization
In the Ders Belgeliği model, art education is conceived not
as technical proficiency but as a humanization process. Each
documentation, intuitive inclination, and formal uncertainty leaves
a trace in the student’s subjectification journey. Here, the human
is defined, following Mengüşoğlu, as “a
thinking, deciding, and stance-taking being.” Students are
not taught how to draw; they draw to see themselves. Formal
solutions seek not only the “beautiful” but
also the “authentic.” Every truth thus
becomes the student’s own truth. Therefore, art education transcends
a mere tool to become a form of humanization, manifesting as an
intuitive signature permeating every document.
4. The Teacher-Student Relationship: From Autonomy to
Taking a Stance — A Practice of Humanization and Social
Transformation
The teacher-student relationship in the Ders Belgeliği model
moves away from traditional hierarchical power dynamics, becoming an
ethical and existential responsibility domain. In the early stages,
the teacher imparts fundamental technical knowledge and discipline,
preparing the ground for the student’s original journey. However,
this support does not render the student passive; it provides tools
and language necessary for the student to see with their own eyes.
The teacher’s role evolves as the student gains confidence in their
artistic intuition and stance—from an authority figure to a guide,
interrogator, and witness. The focus shifts from “What
should you draw?” to “Why did you make
this drawing?” Students are thus encouraged to take full
responsibility for their art and stance.
This process aligns with Mengüşoğlu’s human philosophy, supporting
the student’s courage to take a stance on the world based on their
reason. The Ders Belgeliği model aims for complete autonomy
in the student’s artistic production; yet, this autonomy is
inseparable from responsibility. Students consciously advance their
humanization journey by owning the consequences of their decisions.
The teacher ethically supports this process, respecting the
student’s originality and encouraging self-discovery. This
humanization practice extends beyond individual education, carrying
the potential for social transformation. Graduates are not only
technically skilled artists but critical thinkers and socially aware
individuals capable of taking stances.
Art education here positions itself as a transformative force,
turning the student’s inner journey into a practice of understanding
the world and society. Thus, the Ders Belgeliği model is an
ethically charged humanization practice where Mengüşoğlu’s human
philosophy materializes in the studio, fostering autonomy and stance
under the teacher’s guidance. It envisions cultivating free
individuals with social sensitivity, beyond individual existence.
5. The Role of Abstraction and Empathy
in the Humanization and Stance-Taking Process within the Ders
Belgeliği Model
5.1 Abstraction and Empathy: The Dual Dynamic of
Humanization
Wilhelm Worringer links artistic formal tendencies with human
existential anxieties and needs. Empathy reflects the individual’s
bond with the world; the artist takes objects and forms from reality
and attempts to know and make sense of them. This process forms the
student’s first conscious contact with reality. The Ders
Belgeliği model translates this conceptual framework into
pedagogical practice: the student first empathizes with external
reality through observation and imitation, internalizing formal and
structural reality.
Abstraction, as Worringer defines it, is a detachment from form and
a turn inward. The student reconstructs the observed reality through
their intuition and aesthetic preferences. In the Ders Belgeliği model,
this phase is the critical threshold where the student transitions
to original expression, individual meaning-making, and an
existential stance. This dual process serves as the pedagogical
foundation of humanization: the student connects both with the world
and themselves.
5.2 Development of the Ability to Take a Stance:
Pedagogical Dialectics
In the Ders Belgeliği process, empathy and abstraction
operate dialectically. The student first strives to understand
objective reality and connect with it; however, this connection does
not confine but opens the path to freedom. In the abstraction phase,
the student dissects, interprets, transforms, and asserts their
unique stance. For example, a student might initially draw a tree
realistically but later reduce its lines to geometric shapes or
alter its form to express an emotional impact. This shift is not
only aesthetic but ethical: the student presents their own viewpoint
and stance through art.
This pedagogical dialectic embodies Mengüşoğlu’s philosophy of “taking
a stance.” While creating art with their reason and
intuition, the student simultaneously builds their humanity; this is
the core objective of the Ders Belgeliği model.
5.3 Contribution of the Ders Belgeliği Model
to the Humanization and Stance-Taking Process
The Ders Belgeliği model makes the student’s journey
visible through documentation practice. Every choice, hesitation,
and retrial is recorded, allowing the student to concretely observe
their development and stance. This process is a pedagogical practice
of self-knowledge and self-regulation. For instance, a student might
initially aim to represent object details as faithfully as possible,
then later gravitate towards abstract forms—reflecting their inner
transformation visually. Documentation invites self-reflection with
questions like, “Why did I choose this?” or “What
do I want to express with this drawing?” This practice also
transforms the teacher-student relationship; the teacher becomes a
questioner, guide, and companion supporting the student’s
humanization.
5.4 Future Perspectives: Digitalization and
Multidisciplinary Approaches
When enriched with digital environments, the foundational
pedagogical structure of the Ders Belgeliği model becomes
more effective and accessible. Digital portfolios allow systematic
recording of the entire creative process and deepen learning with
instant feedback. Virtual studios serve as creative platforms where
learners from various disciplines converge, bringing humanization to
a collective dimension.
Furthermore, the Ders Belgeliği model can be applied in
interdisciplinary education fields such as architecture, design, and
music, carrying the abstraction-empathy dialectic into diverse
domains. This enhances the model’s universality and adaptability.
References
· Worringer,
Wilhelm. Abstraction and Empathy: A Contribution to
the Psychology of Style. 1907.
· Mengüşoğlu,
Takiyettin. Philosophy and Man (Felsefe ve İnsan). Ankara
University Press, 1963.
《课程记录》：在艺术教育中实现心灵的修养与个性的生成
“课程记录”模式不仅仅是记录艺术创作的过程，更是一种以“人之为人”为核心的教育方式。在教学实践中，它超越了技艺的传授，而转向个性养成与内在觉察的路径。
此模式以沃林格（Wilhelm Worringer）所提出的“抽象”与“移情”理论为基础，重新建构了艺术教育的过程：
- “移情”：学生通过细致观察现实世界，产生真实的感知与情感共鸣；
- “抽象”：在此基础上，发展出具有个体特征的表达方式。
在这个交织过程中，学生逐步形成自我立场，并通过持续的记录与反思，培养出对内心世界与外部现实之间关系的洞察力。
因此，“课程记录”不仅是学习艺术的方式，更是一种修身之道。它鼓励学生通过艺术实践实现“知行合一”，在创作中探寻“自我何在”，最终走向精神的自由与人格的成熟。
