TERM
PAPER
CRITIQUE
OF JUDGEMENT-
IMMANUEL
KANT
MITHYA
A
I
MA ECL
LCL05151
Immanuel
Kant and Critique of Judgment
All
our knowledge begins with the senses, proceeds then to the understanding, and
ends with reason. There is nothing higher than reason; this is the comment of
Immanuel Kant- a major enlightenment philosopher. Kant’s this observation
contributes to the philosophies of later periods, up to modern times. Immanuel
Kant is noted for his contribution in the field of Aestheticism, Enlightenment
etc. Kant and Hegel often mentioned
jointly for their contribution to the field of modern philosophy. Both Kant and
Hegel were spokesmen of ‘art for art’s sake’ and the ‘art ends in themselves.
Immanuel
Kant born in East Prussia in the year 1724, he attended university education
from there and became professor at that same university. He died in the year
1804; he was never travelled outside Prussia and never married. The
biographical details give the information that Kant is secluded to his country
and he was not a social being. But his knowledge travelled beyond the
boundaries and he was actually inspired by the aesthetic ideas of Edmund
Alaxander Baugarten, David Hume and Edmund Burke. Immanuel Kant’s major works
include Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime,
Critique of Pure Reason, Critique of
Practical Reason, and Critique of Judgment. His Critique of Judgment is considered as equal to
Aristotle’s Poetics both are
contributes to treatise on art. Like Aristotle, Kant also gives importance to
spectators’ response rather than artistic production.
Kant’s major works begin with
the Critique of Pure Reason in which
he develops his critical philosophy to overcome David Hume’s ‘Subjectivist
Skepticism’. Kant wished to define the boundaries of human reason and endeavor
in his first book. The first critique was followed by two others: The Critique of Practical Reason and the Critique of judgment. The three books
cover the true, good and beautiful respectively. By the word “critique” Kant
meant a delineation of the fundamental or transcendent conditions necessary to
any particular mental process.
In the work Critique of Pure Reason, Kant says all
human have the ability to understand what happens around them. The data given
by the outside world can be able to process, organize and comprehend by each
individual. In the work Critique of
Practical Reason attempts to provide a universal foundation for morals, the
non-physical ideas, not the material realities. The first two books created a
gap between the physical or sensible and non-physical or supersensible worlds.
Humans have the freedom to think and make judgment, at the same time they are
physical creatures subject to causalities. The third book Critique of Judgment
narrowed the gap between sensible and supersensible.
The
literature on the Critique of Judgment
divides into two traditions, one focusing Kant’s overall philosophical project
and the other focusing on the theory of art one can be derive from Kant’s work.
Most of Kant’s example comes from nature, even though the book is about art.
Aesthetic according to Kant experienced through senses than to something
specifically artistic. The word “aesthetic” its Greek root means ‘of the
senses’ aids Kant’s efforts to get from the sensory to the supersensible.
Critique of Judgment
The Critique of the Power
of Judgment comprises of two main parts, the “Critique of Aesthetic Power
of Judgment” and “Critique of the Teleological Power of Judgment”. The first of
these discusses our judgments about beauty and sublimity in both nature and art
that is called as aesthetic judgment. The second part discusses our judgments
about the systematic organization of specific things within nature, namely
organisms, as well as our tendency to think of nature as a whole as if it were
a single as well as designed system and to that extent like one big organism
itself.
Aesthetic
judgments about the beautiful and sublime and teleological judgments about the
goals of natural systems and of nature as a whole are both instances of what he
calls “reflecting judgment” a use of judgment that seeks to discover a concept
for a particular object that is given to it rather than to find particular
object to which apply a concept that it already has.
Kant argues that
both aesthetic and teleological judgments are strictly speaking non-cognitive:
they may discover concepts or something like concepts and use them for various
purposes, but they do not themselves yield knowledge.
A second connection between
aesthetic and teleological judgment is both involve perceptions of what Kant
called “Purposiveness” or goal directedness:
in finding an object beautiful or sublime, our experience of the object
is purposive or satisfies a goal of our own even though we do not think of the
object itself as having been designed for a purpose. Kant calls this
“purposiveness without a purpose”. In teleological judgment we think of an
organism or even the whole nature as if it were designed for a purpose, a
conception of nature which is supposed to have heuristic value for us even
though we do not and cannot know that anything in nature has been designed for
a purpose.
According to Kant, what is
subjective in a presentation of an object is its aesthetic character. The objective
elements of a presentation are its logical validity. In order to understand an
object, the two senses subjective and objective should be together. The
subjective of a presentation is the reaction f pleasure and displeasure.
Pleasure and displeasure is not a cognitive understanding, cognition means the
process by which knowledge and understanding is developed in the mind.
The
Judgment of Taste is Aesthetic: Kant says if we wish to judge anything is
beautiful, we do not analyze it with means of cognition but by means of
imagination. The representation of an object wholly to the subject and what is
more to its feeling that is pleasure and displeasure. Actually this pleasure
and displeasure does not contribute to our knowledge. The determining ground
for judgment of taste is subjective. Even the representation of an object is
rational but is referred in a judgment simply to the subject and its feelings,
then the judgment at an extent aesthetic.
Delight
which determine judgment of taste is our interest. The interest of a person is
influenced by desire. For example, the judgment on the beautiful which is not
interested or with least interest will be vary partial and not a pure judgment
of taste. The disinterest in the representation will create pure moral judgment.
So our liking largely influences our judgment.
In
the critique, Kant next deals with ‘agreeable’ ‘good’ and ‘beautiful’
respectively. Kant gives definition to each idea. Let us start with agreeable.
Agreeable is what the senses like in sensation. Agreeable is not simply what we
like, but what please us. In order to find what is agreeable, there is no need
of judgment at all about the character of the object that is made to enjoy- no
need of all other judging. Next is good, we call something is good for if we
like it only as a means. If it is useful to us we call it good. But we call
something intrinsically good- or good in itself, if we like it for its own
sake. The “good” always contains a concept of purpose.
Sometimes people misinterpret
the terms ‘good’ and ‘agreeable’ as synonyms. But these are two different
ideas. For judging goodness of an object a person should know the concept of
it. But for gratification the determination of an object is not necessary. It
is true that in many cases it seems as if the agreeable and the good are one
and the same. People say all gratification, if it lasts, is intrinsically good.
If we say an object is agreeable, we only attribute it to the senses. But if we
call the object good, we bring it under the principle of reason and concept of
purpose.
In
simple words we can say that, Agreeable is what gratifies us, Beautiful is what
we just like and good is what we esteem. Agreeable can be applicable to
non-rational animals too. Beauty is only for human beings and the good holds
for every rational being. Agreeable is a personal judgment because it differs
from person to person. But it is quite different for “beautiful” if a person
proclaims something beautiful then he/she requires same liking from others.
Judgment
of agreeable is the taste of sense. Judgment of beautiful is the taste of reflection.
But both judgments are aesthetic. Kant says a judgment of taste must involve a
claim to subjective universality. Subjective universality means a person should
judge the object as one containing ground of delight for all human beings.
A pure judgment of taste is independent
of charm and emotion. The beauty is judge on the basis of its purposiveness not
on the interest of reason, whether it gratifies or pains us. The judgment of
taste made out of the charm and emotion lacks universality or in case if it
gets wide acceptance, it is only because that judgment of taste diminished to
the extent that sensations of that kind are included among the bases
determining taste. It is a flaw that beauty is judged on the basis of material
embellishments.
According to Kant, there are two types
of aesthetic judgments. The primary one is, Empirical judgments it asserts that
an object or a way of presenting an object is agreeable or disagreeable. The
second type is pure judgments, if it asserts that it is beautiful. Empirical
aesthetic judgments are judgments of sense. Pure aesthetic judgments are
properly judgment of taste.
There
are two types of beauty, Free beauty and Accessory beauty. Free beauty does not
presuppose a concept of what the object meant to be. Accessory beauty does
presuppose and also object’s perfection in terms of that concept. The free
kinds of beauty are called self-subsistent beauties of a thing. The accessory
beauty is also called conditioned beauty, which judges a thing under the
concept of a particular purpose. When we judge free beauty then our judgment of
taste is pure.
Kant’s concept of ideal of beauty says that
there is no rule for taste that determines by concepts of what is beautiful.
The universal concept of judging a beauty is empirical criterion. The subject’s
feeling decides the beauty not the concept of an object. Ideal of imagination
rests on exhibition not on concepts.
Kant
also states that taste is a kind of sensus
communis, a sense shared by all of
us. The principle of this “common sense” is to think for oneself, in an
unbiased way; to think from the perspective of everyone else. The base for
judgment of taste is always subjective, but it assumes that the judgment is
necessary for everyone, so it could be like an objective principle, demand
universal acceptance.
In a judgment of taste the
imagination must be considered in its freedom. Imagination is free and yet
lawful of itself, the understanding alone gives the law. If a product judged in
terms of a determinate law, it is not the judgment of taste.
The
judgment of sublime: the beautiful and the sublime are similar in some
respects. They both concerned with pleasure rather than knowledge. The pleasure
arises from the way in which the object is presented to us, not the object itself.
But there are some differences in beautiful and sublime. The beautiful is
concerned about the form of the object, which consists in objects and bounded
together, but sublime can also be found in formless object. Beautiful is the
exhibition of an indeterminate concept of understanding. Sublime is the
exhibition of an indeterminate concept of reason. In the case of beautiful our
liking is connected with the presentation of quality, but in the case of
sublime with the presentation of quantity. In sublimity not only positive
pleasure as rather admiration and respect, and so should be called a negative
pleasure. Sublime gives rise to a different response. Sublimity is the result
of attunement, which means mental sensation that attends perceiving an object
that exceeds the capacity of our senses. So the sublime is not in fact a
quality of nature but our own minds.
Kant’s
opinion on “nature as a might”: might is an ability that is superior to great
obstacles. When in an aesthetic judgment we consider nature as a mighty that
has no dominance over us, ten it is dynamically sublime; consider it as an
object of fear. We consider an object fearful without being afraid of it. Thus
a virtuous person fears God without being afraid of him. The person does not
think of wanting resist God and his commandments as a possibility that should
worry him. If in judging nature aesthetically we call it sublime, we do so not
because nature arouses fear, but because it calls forth our strength to regard
as small the objects of our natural concerns like property, health and life.
Kant
comments upon art in general; the result of art distinguished from that of
nature, the first being a work, the second is an effect. Art is production
through freedom based on reason. Art as
a human skill also distinguished from science and art can predict the desired
effect. Art is distinguished from craft. Art is also called as free art, and
craft is called mercenary art and craft is regarded as labour attracts us only
through its effect, which is pay.
What
is genius according to Kant- the mental powers whose combination in certain
relations constitutes genius are imagination and understanding. Kant says
genius is a talent for art not for science. Since it is an artistic talent, it
presupposes a determinate concept of the product, namely its purpose. Artistic
talent manifests in itself not so much in the fact, that the proposed purpose
is achieved in exhibiting a determinate concept.
At
the last section Kant discuss beauty as the symbol of morality. He compares
judgment of taste and judgment of moral. Kant says beauty is the symbol of
morally good. Beautiful we like directly not in its concept as we do in
morality. Beautiful we like without any interest but for morally good there is
necessarily an interest. In judging the beautiful we present the freedom of the
will and will’s harmony with universal laws and reasons. We present the
subjective principle for judging the beautiful as universal. Moral judgment is
capable of having determinate constitutive principles.
Kant’s
basic notion is that a sensory experience of pleasure can move from the
subjective, that is pleasing me, to the objective that should please everyone. He
is not somehow averse to using art and literature for moral purposes; he is
simply concerned to establish that these spheres have certain autonomy and
that, when they are connected with other spheres such as morality and practical
usefulness, the nature of the connection clearly understood.
Kant’s
philosophy and aesthetics influenced widely, especially in the field of
Romantic thought and Romantic conception of literary imagination. His notions
of artistic form, aesthetic freedom, genius and the non-utilitarian, non-moral
character of art exerted, for example, profound impact on his contemporaries
Goethe and Schiller. Kant’s philosophy had less literary because his entire
example came from the nature. But his ideas are applicable to literary fields
too. Kant contributed to Romantic and Modern period and his characterization of
art became target of Post World War II theorists and philosophers. Kant’s ideas
are complicated so literary examples on his ideas are difficult to find.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Primary
Source:
·
Leitch, Vincent B. (Ed). The Norton Anthology of Theory and
Criticism. NewYork: Norton, 2001. 499-535.Web.
Secondary
source
·
Abrams, M. H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. Wadsworth:
Cengage, 2012. Print
·
Habib, M. A. R. Literary Criticism from Plato
to the Present: AN INTRODUCTION. Singapore: Blckwell, 2011.Print
Gayer, Paul. Kant. NewYork:Routledge, 2006. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment