Matters of Taste: Kant’s Epistemological Aesthetics

• Zoltán Papp ^[1]
  1. [1] Eötvös Loránd University

     Eötvös Loránd University

     Hungría

     
• Localización: Con-textos Kantianos: International Journal of Philosophy, ISSN-e 2386-7655, Nº. 12, 2020 (Ejemplar dedicado a: La teoría estética de Kant), págs. 402-428
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen

  • This paper is concerned with what I believe is the epistemological mission of Kant’s doctrine of taste. The third Critique inherits two problems from the first. The evident one is that the categorial constitution of nature must be complemented with the notion of purposiveness. The less evident one is that the transcendental theory of experience needs a common sense in order to secure a common objectivity. The judgment of taste, conceived of by Kant as a ‘cognition in general’ not restricted to either the particular subject or the particular object, offers a solution. It turns out to be a judgment that cannot be made without assuming the purposiveness of nature and the uniformity of the cognizing subjects.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Allais L. (2015), Manifest Realism. Kant’s Idealism and his Realism, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Allison H. E. (2001), Kant’s Theory of Taste. A Reading of the Critique of Aesthetic Judgment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Avramides A. (2001), Other Minds, Routledge, Abingdon.
  • Ginsborg H. (2015), The Normativity of Nature. Essays on Kant’s Critique of Judgment, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Guyer P. (1979), Kant and the Claims of Taste, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Guyer P. (2005), “The Harmony of the Faculties Revisited”, in Guyer, The Values of Beauty, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 77-109.
  • Heidemann D. H. (1998), Kant und das Problem des metaphysischen Idealismus, De Gruyter, Berlin.
  • Hughes F. (2007), Kant’s Aesthetic Epistemology. Form and World, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.
  • Kant I. (1997), “Metaphysik Mrongovius”, in Kant, Lectures on Metaphysics, trans. and ed. K. Ameriks and S. Naragon, Cambridge University...
  • Kant I. (1998), Critique of Pure Reason, trans. and ed. P. Guyer and A. W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Kant I. (2000), Critique of the Power of Judgment, trans. P. Guyer and E. Matthews, ed. P. Guyer, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Kant I. (2002), “Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics That Will Be Able to Come Forward as Science”, trans. Gary Hatfield, in Kant, Theoretical...
  • Kemp Smith N. (1923 [1918]), A Commentary on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, Macmillan, London.
  • Kuehn M. (1987), Scottish Common Sense in Germany, 1768–1800. A Contribution to the History of Critical Philosophy, McGill-Queen’s University...
  • Küplen M. (2015), Beauty, Ugliness and the Free Play of Imagination. An Approach to Kant’s Aesthetics, Springer, Heidelberg.
  • Longuenesse B. (1998), Kant and the Capacity to Judge. Sensibility and Discursivity in the Transcendental Analytic of the Critique of Pure...
  • Massimi M. (2017), “What is this Thing Called ‘Scientific Knowledge’? – Kant on Imaginary Standpoints and the Regulative Role of Reason”,...
  • Massimi M. and Breitenbach A. (eds.) (2017), Kant and the Laws of Nature, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Matherne S. (2019), “Kant on Aesthetic Autonomy and Common Sense”, Philosophers’ Imprint 19, no. 24, pp. 1-22.
  • Schulting D. and Verburgt J. (eds) (2011), Kant’s Idealism. New Interpretations of a Controversial Doctrine, Springer, Dordrecht.
  • Shier D. (1998), “Why Kant finds nothing ugly”, British Journal of Aesthetics 38, no. 4, pp 412-418.
  • Wachter A. (2006), Das Spiel in der Ästhetik, De Gruyter, Berlin.
  • Wenzel Ch. (1999), “Kant finds nothing ugly?”, British Journal of Aesthetics 39, no. 4, pp. -422.
  • Zhouhuang Zh. (2016), Der sensus communis bei Kant. Zwischen Erkenntnis, Moralität und Schönheit, De Gruyter, Berlin.