The Demands of Taste in Kant's Aesthetics (Continuum Studies in Philosophy)

189 Pages·2006·11.79 MB·English

by  Brent Kalar

The Demands of Taste in
Kant’s Aesthetics
Brent Kalar
Continuum
The Demands of Taste in Kant's Aesthetics
Continuum Studies in Philosophy:
Series Editor: James Fieser, University of Tennessee at Martin
Aesthetics in Kant, James Kirwan
Aquinas and the Ship of Theseus, Christopher Brown
Descartes and the Metaphysics of Human Mature, Justin Skirry
Kierkegaard's Analysis of Radical Evil, David A. Roberts
Leibniz Re-interpreted, Lloyd Strickland
Nietzsche and the Greeks, Dale Wilkerson
Platonism, Music and the Listener's Share, Christopher Norris
Popper's Theory of Science, Carlos Garcia
Rousseau and the Ethics of Virtue, James Delaney
Rousseau's Theory of Freedom, Matthew Simpson
St Augustine and the Theory of Just War, John M. Mattox
St Augustine of Hippo, R. W. Dyson
Tolerance and the Ethical Life, Andrew Fiala
Wittgenstein's Religious Point of View, Tim Labron
The Demands of Taste in Kant's
Aesthetics
Brent Kalar
continuum
Continuum International Publishing Group
The Tower Building 80 Maiden Lane
11 York Road Suite 704
London New York
SE1 7NX NY 10038
© Brent Kalar 2006
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by
any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage
or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers.
Brent Kalar has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be
identified as Author of this work
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
ISBN: 0-8264-8890-0 (hardback)
Typeset by BookEns Ltd.,
Printed and bound in Great Britain by Biddies Ltd, Kings Lynn, Norfolk
To my parents, Allen and Barbara Kalar
This page intentionally left blank
Contents
Acknowledgements ix

Abbreviations xi
Introduction 1
I What is Implied in a Judgement of Taste?
1. Overview of the Chapter 9
2. Hume's Problems with Taste 11
3. The Humean Reading of Kant's Judgement of Taste: Guyer 19
4. The Normative Reading of Kant's Judgement of Taste 26
5. The Two Demands in the Judgement of Taste 32
6. Conclusions 35
II The Problem of Free Play
1. Overview of the Chapter 37
2. Introduction to the Harmony of the Faculties in Free Play 38
3. Background to Free Play 41
4. A Preliminary Interpretation of Free Play: Allison 50
5. Problems with the Preliminary Interpretation 55
6. Conclusions 64
III The Problem of the Form of Purposiveness
1. Overview of the Chapter 65
2. The Form of Purposiveness: A Preliminary Account (Critique of 66
Judgment §§10-15)
3. The Form of Purposiveness as the Basis of Pleasure in the Beautiful: 71
Opening
4. Excursus on the Subjectivity of the Beautiful 73
5. The Form of Purposiveness as the Basis of Pleasure in the Beautiful: 78
Closing
6. Free and Adherent Beauty and the Ideal of the Beautiful 82
7. Conclusions 89
viii Contents
IV Beauty and Aesthetic Ideas
1. Overview of the Chapter 91
2. Aesthetic Ideas: Opening Remarks 92
3. The Standardness Condition 96
4. The Originality Condition 102
5. Standardness and Originality in the Form of the Beautiful 106
6. Standardness and Originality in Free Play 112
7. Conclusions 119
V Pleasure and Justification
1. Overview of the Chapter 120
2. Free Play and Pleasure 121
3. The Problem of the Deduction 127
4. The 'Official' Deduction of Taste in §38 133
5. The Transcendental Deduction of Taste: §21 137
6. Conclusions 145
Notes 147
Bibliography 167
Index 173
Acknowledgement
The present study of Kant's theory of the foundations of taste began as a revision
of my Ph.D. thesis for publication, but ended, as such projects often do, as a
completely new book. While The Demands of Taste in Kant's Aesthetics contains
very little of the original text of my earlier thesis, is structured differently, and
changes several key claims, I believe that it nevertheless could not have been
written had I not first done the dissertation. Accordingly, I owe significant
thanks to the individuals with whom I studied Kant in graduate school for
making the present work possible. I would like first to thank my dissertation
committee — Stanley Cavell, Christine Korsgaard and Richard Moran — for
their years of encouragement and support, intellectual and otherwise. My debts
to each of them are unfathomable. I would also like to acknowledge the
contributions of Henry Allison and Charles Parsons to my thinking about Kant.
Both of these eminent Kant scholars were very generous in allowing me to sit in
on their Kant seminars in the late nineties, for which I will be forever grateful. I
was especially fortunate to attend a year-long seminar on the Third Critique
given by Professor Allison in 1998—99 that dramatically improved my
understanding of Kant's aesthetics. More disturbingly for someone trying to
complete a Ph.D. thesis, the experience of Professor Allison's vast erudition and
keen analytical intellect made me question, for a while at least, whether I could
hope to improve on his interpretation of Kant's theory of the beautiful. While I
no longer agree with his reading in its entirety, Professor Allison's influence
remains, I trust, evident throughout what follows — particularly in my
endorsement of what I call the 'normative' reading of the judgement of taste
and the 'intentionalistic' reading of aesthetic pleasure.
My thinking about Kant's aesthetics began to evolve away from my
dissertation largely as a result of repeatedly teaching the Third Critique to
undergraduates and graduates at the University of New Mexico. I would like to
thank the students in my aesthetics courses for useful interchange. I would also
like to express my gratitude to my colleagues at the University of New Mexico,
especially Russell Goodman and Iain Thomson, for stimulating discussions
about Kant. I also owe special thanks to colleagues John Taber and Mary
Domski for their useful comments on earlier drafts. Professor Taber was
instrumental in keeping this project on track, and in providing much-
appreciated encouragement and moral support. I am indebted to Professor