Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Pleasure in a beautiful object can be independent of subsumption under any determinate concept and yet be universally valid for all who properly respond to the object.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aesthetic judgment is always shaped by culturally and historically specific frameworks that vary across communities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the conditions for aesthetic response are culturally variable, no pleasure can claim validity independent of those conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Cultural variability in aesthetic response cannot be explained away as mere failure of 'proper' response without circularity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's rule-following argument shows that no cognitive activity is intelligible apart from shared practices and criteria.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'free play' of faculties requires no shared criteria or concepts, it cannot generate communicable or universally claimable judgments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Universal validity requires precisely the kind of conceptual grounding that the Kantian account of beauty explicitly disavows.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Pleasure in a beautiful object is an expression of the free play of the cognitive faculties of imagination and understanding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The cognitive faculties of imagination and understanding work the same way in everyone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The free play of imagination and understanding does not require subsumption of the object under a determinate concept.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42