Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2582100460> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 51 of
51
with 100 items per page.
- W2582100460 endingPage "419" @default.
- W2582100460 startingPage "409" @default.
- W2582100460 abstract "I am grateful to the commentators for their sympathetic and thoughtful attention to my work. The questions and objections they raise go to the heart of my project, and, while it has been rewarding to work through them, it has not been easy to respond to them. For reasons of space, I have not been able to address every point raised, but I have tried to respond to those which I find most challenging. One distinctive feature of my interpretation of Kant’s aesthetics is its insistence on the subjective character of the judgement of beauty for Kant. It is important for my understanding of the role such judgements play in revealing the ‘subjective condition’ of objective judgement that they cannot themselves be reduced to a species of objective judgement; both Karl Ameriks and Richard Moran, in different ways, put pressure on this feature of my view. In his own important work on the Critique of Judgement,1 Ameriks has argued that beauty should be construed as objective in something like the sense in which secondary qualities are objective, suggesting that the reasons which Kant gives for denying the objectivity of beauty are no less applicable in the case of the status of qualities like colour and fragrance.2 In his contribution here, Ameriks does not explicitly defend the objectivity of beauty for Kant, but he does suggest that judgements of beauty should be assimilated to a range of judgements about how things appear to us in perception—for example, that dry ice appears hot to the touch—which, because of their stability across different human individuals, might well be called objective. And he grounds this suggestion in Kant’s own writings by pointing out that such judgements already appear in Kant under the name of judgements of perception. Why can’t I allow that judgements of beauty are subjective merely in the sense that, unlike judgements of experience, they do not characterize ‘the lawlike determinable nature of things’? Ameriks suggests that this is because I am committed to endorsing Kant’s claim for the ‘autonomy’ of taste: in order to judge something to be beautiful, I must feel pleasure in it myself. But, he says, given that part of what I am claiming is that my judgement is appropriate to the object, it seems most natural to suppose that I am making a claim about how ‘normal’ human beings, human beings with a ‘healthy’ common sense, should react to the object. And that, he suggests, puts my judgement on a par with (objective) judgements about the perceptual appearances of things." @default.
- W2582100460 created "2017-02-03" @default.
- W2582100460 creator A5063767953 @default.
- W2582100460 date "2016-10-01" @default.
- W2582100460 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
- W2582100460 title "Replies to My Critics" @default.
- W2582100460 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/aesthj/ayw063" @default.
- W2582100460 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
- W2582100460 type Work @default.
- W2582100460 sameAs 2582100460 @default.
- W2582100460 citedByCount "1" @default.
- W2582100460 countsByYear W25821004602021 @default.
- W2582100460 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2582100460 hasAuthorship W2582100460A5063767953 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConcept C2482559 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConcept C26760741 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConcept C2776548248 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConcept C2780620123 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConceptScore W2582100460C107038049 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConceptScore W2582100460C111472728 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConceptScore W2582100460C138885662 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConceptScore W2582100460C15744967 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConceptScore W2582100460C2482559 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConceptScore W2582100460C26760741 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConceptScore W2582100460C2776548248 @default.
- W2582100460 hasConceptScore W2582100460C2780620123 @default.
- W2582100460 hasIssue "4" @default.
- W2582100460 hasLocation W25821004601 @default.
- W2582100460 hasOpenAccess W2582100460 @default.
- W2582100460 hasPrimaryLocation W25821004601 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W1977718207 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2034413345 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2140699125 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2300955355 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2347685136 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2351898581 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2381024402 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2384097683 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2385206344 @default.
- W2582100460 hasRelatedWork W2500070881 @default.
- W2582100460 hasVolume "56" @default.
- W2582100460 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2582100460 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2582100460 magId "2582100460" @default.
- W2582100460 workType "article" @default.