Table Of ContentNelson Goodman and the Case for
a Kalological Aesthetics
Nelson Goodman
and the Case for a
Kalological Aesthetics
Nikolaos Gkogkas
Foreword by
T. j. Diffey
Palgrave
macmillan
* © Nikolaos Gkogkas 2008
Foreword © T. j. Diffey 2008
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2008 978-0-230-57355-0
All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this
publication may be made without written permission.
No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted
save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence
permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright licensing Agency,
Saffron House, 6-10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS.
Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication
may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.
The author has asserted his right to be identified as the author of this work in
accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
First published 2008 by
PALGRAVE MACMILLAN
Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited,
registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke,
Hampshire RG21 6XS.
Palgrave Macmillan in the US is a division of St Martin's Press LLC,
175 Fifth Avenue. New York, NY 10010.
Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies
and has companies and representatives throughout the world.
Palgrave® and MacmiUan® are registered trademarks in the United States,
the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries.
ISBN 978-1-349-36472-5 ISBN 978-0-230-28625-2 (eBook)
DOI 10.1057/9780230286252
This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully
managed and sustained forest sources. Logging, pulping and manufacturing
processes are expected to conform to the environmental regulations of the
country of origin.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Gkogkas, Nikolaos, 1973-
Nelson Goodman and the case for a kalological aesthetics I
Nikolaos Gkogkas; foreword by T. j. Diffey.
p. em.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Goodman, Nelson-Aesthetics. 2. Aesthetics, Modern- 20th century.
3. Art- Philosophy. I. Title.
BH221.US4G66 2008
111 '.85092-dc22 2008016156
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08
Tran !erred to Digital Printing 2011
3a I1BoHY
For Ivana
Beauty is life when life unveils her holy face.
But you are life and you are the veil.
Beauty is eternity gazing at itself ill a mirror.
But you are eternity ana you are tile mirror.
(Gibran, 1992, p. 97)
Contents
Foreword by T. f. Diffey xii
Acknowledgements xii
Abbreviations xiii
Questions in Aesthetics 1
1.1 KalologicaJ aesthetics I
1.2 Goodman's symbology 4
1.2.1 Languages 6
1.2.2 Systems 7
1.2.3 Symbols 8
1.2.4 An aesthetic theory of symbols 13
1.3 Meanings 17
1.4 Aesthetic and non-aesthetic, I: exemplification 21
1.5 Notationality 28
1.6 Authentic art, autographic art 32
1.6.1 Perceiving history 34
1.6.2 The redundant allographic 36
1.7 Pictures are imitated 40
1.7.1 T he inadequacy of fidelity 43
1.7.2 The inadequacy of syntax 47
1.7.3 A different likeness 53
1.8 Sounds are traced 55
1.9 Texts are performed 61
1.10 Aesthetic and non-aesthetic,
II: the symptom(s) orthe aesthetic 68
1.11 Time, style and identity 7S
1.11.1 Practice 78
1.11.2 Style as history 81
1.11.3 Identity in multiplicity 83
1.12 Aesthetic and non-aesthetic,
11[: a matter of understanding 85
l.lZ.1 Pleasure and utility 88
vii
viii COli tents
2 Aesthetics and Understanding 91
2.1 Logic as reference 91
2.2 The 'grue' colours of platonism 92
2.3 Pragmatic but irreal constructions 100
2.4 Making worlds 105
2.S Rightness is larger than truth 110
3 Aesthetics and Kalology 114
3.1 The way to bare being 114
3.2 Kalology as a metaphysical aesthetics of presence 118
3.3 A grand theory? 123
3.4 Answers and questions 125
3.4.1 Overview 125
3.4.2 Tradition and practice 134
Appendix 1: Nelson Goodman Works List 139
Appendix 2: Nelson Goodman Reprints List 142
Nores 154
References 1S6
Index 161
Foreword
Nikolaos Gkogkas has a thorough knowledge of Goodman's philosophy
to share with the readers of this book. He offers us an understanding of
Goodman's philosophy in general and of Goodman's philosophy of art
in particular. A guide and indeed a teacher is needed to understand
Goodman's philosophy, since that philosophy is not of the kind where
knowledge of the language it is written in and native wit are sufficient
to carry one through.
There are two strikingly different species of philosophy. The first is
contiguous with common sense and general knowledge, and proceeds
by intelligent reflection upon what we already know and think. This
philosophy is not to be despised and indeed is to be honoured and
prized. It clarifies OUT thinking and deepens our understanding by set
ting our habitual thinking in a new light, the light of self-knowledge_
When properly done this philosophy puts confusion and perplexity to
flight. But other than in these respects, which are indubitably import
ant, it teaches us nothing fundamentally new, nothing we could not
have essentially known without the aid of philosophy. This is where the
second species of philosophy comes in.
This species of philosophy works methodically and moreover is thor
oughly self-conscious and deliberative about its methods. This sort of
philosophy, whatever the differences between its individual practition
ers, and they can be considerable, proceeds by a rigorously methodical
application of first principles. Neither the principles nor the method are
what we can already know and understand independently of and before
we take up the study of philosophy. This philosophy is not a reflection
or extension of common sense but is often contrary to it. It sets conven
tional wisdom aside in the pursuit of a determined understanding of
the matter in hand.
Goodman's philosophy belongs to the second species. As in the case
of the natural sciences, most of what this philosophy has to teach does
not repeat and could not have been anticipated by common sense. It is
not surprising therefore that the literature of aesthetics is full of criti
cisms of Goodman's theses on the grounds that these so obviously
offend common sense. Indeed Goodman's philosophy of art has earned
a certain notoriety for findings that are contrary to 'what we know'. The
most famous example of this perhaps is Goodman's claim that if even
xii
x Foreword
only one wrong note occurs in what we take to be the performance of a
certain musical work then that work has not been performed.
It is not only that this species of philosophy is like the natural sciences
in its not being beholden to common sense or conventional opinion. It
is more that there is continuity if not quite an identity between this sort
of philosophy and the sciences. These features certainly characterize
Goodman's philosophy.
Goodman, as Nikolaos Gkogkas shows, has made a Significant contri·
bution not only to the philosophy of art but to other branches of phil·
osophy too. But there has been something of a polarization between
'mainstream' aestheticians, who see Goodman's account of art as idio·
syncratic, not to say wrongheaded, and other aestheticians, who think
that Goodman has something indispensable to teach us. There is also a
further division between philosophers of art who value Goodman'S
contribution to their field and the followers and supporters of his other
contributions to philosophy, particularly the philosophy of science.
These philosophers cannot understand why such a deep philosopher of
science as Goodman assuredly is should see art and aesthetics not only
as essential to his philosophical enterprise but as a necessary constitu·
ent of its unity. It is Gkogkas's achievement, though not his primary
objective, to show how unconvincing these polarizations around
Goodman's work are. For one thing, Goodman's holistic approach to
philosophy reveals just how philosophically trivial and indeed down·
right misleading these branch names, philosophy of art, philosophy of
science, and so on, are. But perhaps provisionally we need to retain
them, providing we do not take them too seriously, while we go about
the business of seeking to understand Goodman.
$0 with considerable skill Gkogkas shows us why anyone interested in
aesthetics and/or the philosophy of art must come to terms with
Goodman's work and take it seriously. That uncertainty - whether to
speak of aesthetics and/or the philosophy of art often found in the pro·
fessional field today-is itself interesting; and what Goodman has to say
may itself shed some light on the confusion. Gkogkas shows the import·
ance of Goodman'S thought for aesthetics by demonstrating that it
offers nothing less than a shift of paradigm. This shift explains why the
response to Goodman has been so ba(f1ed in some quarters. For it
demands no less than a reconception of the field, including that we
relinqUish attachment to aesthetics as a distinct field to be cultivated
independently of the broader field of philosophy itself.
At the present time aesthetics is flourishing and yet, with one or two
honourable exceptions, there is woefully little curiosity about what it is
