The passage explains the complexity of defining romanticism due to its varied interpretations across different contexts. According to Lovejoy, romanticism is so diverse that it defies a singular definition, making its analysis challenging.
While recent studies acknowledge this diversity, they do not attempt to confine romanticism to a strict definition, time, or place. Instead, they address it through "particular philosophical questions and concerns", aligning with the passage's note on German romantics’ focus on epistemological, metaphysical, ethical, and political issues.
Therefore, the correct conclusion is: Recent studies prefer to focus on the fundamental concerns of the romantics.
The passage discusses the inherent complexity in defining romantic aesthetics and the multitude of interpretations surrounding the concept of romanticism. Prominent scholars such as Arthur Lovejoy and Isaiah Berlin have noted the challenges and debates regarding the definition of romanticism. Lovejoy argues that romanticism lacks a single definitive entity, making it difficult to pin down, while Berlin acknowledges the need for a broader characterization. Romantic aesthetics, as per the passage, is tied to the philosophy that beauty and art should influence all aspects of human life, not just the domains of philosophy and art. This contrasts with the idea that aesthetics should be restricted to a specific area separate from the practical and theoretical aspects of life. The most distinctive romantic commitment is the belief that engagement with art and beauty should shape the entirety of human existence.
Among the options provided:
Read the sentence and infer the writer's tone: "The politician's speech was filled with lofty promises and little substance, a performance repeated every election season."