Interpretation of Immanuel Kant “Critique of
Aesthetic Judgment.”
“The judgment of taste is aesthetic.” We determine the beauty of an object through
the use of imagination and understanding, solely based on the object, and
whether the object gives us pleasure or displeasure. Determinations of likability are derived through
interpretations and conceptual notions of the object, not the object itself. Judgments on objects, to determine beauty, can
be logical. However, any judgments on
the subject, or feelings we derive from an object, are always subjective.
If one likes an object, then they
have an interest in the object. Interest
means that one experiences delight from the object, or its reference. In these instances, desire is at work and
one’s judgment of beauty is compromised.
Desire is a primary human function that drives us to want things. Our notions on beauty cannot be confused or
tainted with want or gratification. It
is the difference between pleasing and gratifying. One must “preserve complete indifference” to
an object if they are to appropriately judge beauty.
There are three kinds of pleasure. The agreeable is what gratifies, the
beautiful is what pleases, and the good is the determination of a things
worth. Worth can be in its use, or it
can be attributed to the object itself. To be beautiful, there first must be
reflection of an object. There has to be some notion between a thing and the
pleasure it inspires. The agreeable is
the individual’s desire revealed by the object.
To be clear, agreeable is not based on the object, but the feelings of
want derived the object. Good is the
understanding of an object. and it is also considered an end concept. To have an understanding of an object is to
formalize the concept of an object. At this point, beautiful is defined as,
“delight or aversion apart from any interest” of the object.
To look upon something beautiful is
look upon something without want or reason.
People will tend to talk about beauty as a “quality of the object”
rather than their thoughts or feelings inspired by the object. Universal subjective beauty is attained when
all interest is removed from the object.
People have their own individual taste, and it is folly to argue over
personal taste. However, to call
something beautiful means someone is speaking with a universal voice. They are making a claim that an object will
evoke the same pleasure in others as it does in them. This claim seeks validity
through confirmation of others experiencing the same delight. Again, to judge something as beautiful is to
experience pleasure or displeasure without want, reason, or the formation of
end concepts.
Pure judgment of taste is “simply
[a] finality of form,” and it is derived from a free play of imagination and
understanding, with the absence of conceptual intent or desires of want. An end is a concept of an object. Finality, an “explanation of an objects
possibility,” is like an end, but without the conceptual intent, or will, to
determine the causality of the object.
Intent is replaced with the imagination and experience that forms
understanding without the benefit of focused cognition. In judging beauty, it is important to
differentiate a pleasure experienced from the concept of a thing, an end, and
the pleasure derived from the object itself.
There is, however, a causality that occurs with beauty. The nature of
beauty manifests pleasure and a natural tendency of “preserving a continuance”
of experiencing that beauty. This
process returns on itself and the beauty “strengthens and reproduces itself.”
There is a distinction between form,
the foundation of beauty, and charms that are added to a beauty. Charms may include contrast, colors, tones
and other elements that are not directly attributed to the design, or the
composition of a beauty. Again, finality
for a beauty is derived from its form.
Charms are accepted as long as they do not change the beauty of an
object. In essence, charms make the form easier to see through clarity and
definition, and they excite and maintain the viewer’s gaze.
Perfection is not relevant to
beauty. Perfection ascribes certain
conditions and rules to establish something as perfect. Conditions and rules are elements of
cognition, recognition and concepts.
Concepts are an end and removed from the judgment of beauty. Objects in nature, such as trees, flowers,
and birds, have no intrinsic rules of perfection, and they please solely on
their own account. Objects of man have
rules to formulate perfection. If the
rules are used to judge, then the object cannot be judged beautiful. However, if a perfect object is judged solely
on it’s pleasure without concepts, reason or desire, than it can be judged as
beautiful.
The final definition of beauty is:
“Beauty is the form of finality in an object, so far as perceived in it apart
form the representation of an end.”
The dynamically sublime in nature is
representative of something that hindrances something, but does not necessarily
have dominion over them. In other words,
the dynamically sublime is an opposing force that people can overcome. If we do not feel we are up to the task, then
we fear the object. The might of the sublime overpowers our senses and displays
human smallness in relation to nature.
In doing so, we become aware of our limitations. However, when viewing art, the sublime still
reveals our limitations, but there is no “seriousness of danger.” We are free to engage the sublime while being
in a position of safety.
Works Cited
Kant, Immanuel. “Critique of Aesthetic Judgment.” Art 623, Aesthetics. Tiffin University. N.d. Web. Sept
1, 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment