Kant and Hegel on Aesthetic Reflexivity

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Professor of Philosophy, FU Berlin, Germany

Abstract

The paper aims at reevaluating a conception of the aesthetic that was developed by Kant and Hegel but that has been widely neglected due to the fact that their positions in aesthetics have been wrongly considered to be antagonistic to one another. The conception states that the aesthetic is a practice of reflecting on other human practices. Kant was the first to articulate this conception, but nevertheless falls short of giving a satisfying account of it, as he doesn’t succeed in explaining its objective aspect. I claim that Hegel resolves this problem by understanding works of art as objects that thermalize essential orientations of historical-cultural practices. But his explanation fails to grasp the specificity of art as a reflective practice. However, Hegel’s position gives us a hint for how to deal with this problem: Reflection has to be understood in a practical, and not in a cognitive sense.

Keywords

References

-         Allison, Henry (2001), Kant’s Theory of Taste (Cambridge University Press).
-         Beardsley, Monroe C. (1981) Aesthetics: Problems in the Philosophy of Criticism (2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1981).
-         Danto, Arthur C. (1981) The Transfiguration of the Commonplace (Harvard University Press, 1981).
-         Dickie, George (1974) Art and the Aesthetic: An Institutional Analysis (Cornell University Press,).
-         Gadamer, Hans-Georg (1987) The Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays, ed. by Robert Bernasconi (Cambridge University Press).
-         Ginsborg, Hannah (1990) “Reflective Judgment and Taste,” in: Noûs 24, pp. 63-78.
-         Guyer, Paul (1979) Kant and the Claims of Taste (Cambridge University Press).
-         Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich (1975), Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, trans. T. M. Knox, vol. I (Oxford: Clarendon).
-         Henrich, Dieter (1971) “Self-consciousness, a Critical Introduction to a Theory,” Man and World 4:1, pp. 3-28.
-         Kant, Immanuel,(1999) Critique of Judgment, trans. P. Guyer and A. Wood (Cambridge University Press).
-         Menke, Christoph (1999), the Sovereignty of Art: Aesthetic Negativity in Adorno and Derrida (Cambridge: MIT Press).
-         Moran, Richard,(2001) Authority and Estrangement (Princeton University Press).
-         Pinkard, Terry,(2007) “Symbolic, Classical, and Romantic Art,” in Hegel and the Arts, ed. Stephen Houlgate (Northwestern University Press,) pp. 3-28.
-         Pippin, Robert B.(2014), After the Beautiful: Hegel and the Philosophy of Pictorial Modernism (University of Chicago Press,).
-         Pippin, Robert B., (2008) “The Absence of Aesthetics in Hegel’s Aesthetics,” in The Cambridge Companion to Hegel and Nineteenth Century Philosophy, ed. F. Beiser (Cambridge University Press,), pp. 394-418.
-         Seel, Martin,(2004)Aesthetics of Appearing (Stanford University Press).
-         Weitz, Moritz, (1953) “The Role of Theory in Aesthetics,” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 62, pp. 27-35.
-         Zuckert, Rachel, (2007)“Kant’s Rationalist Aesthetics,” Kant-Studien 98: 443-463
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics