Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Schopenhauer argues aesthetic experience requires the complete suspension of willing and desire, making 'pleasure' a category error for aesthetic states.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Even disinterested aesthetic attention produces genuine satisfaction—enjoying a painting's colors is a real positive feeling.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Complete suspension of willing seems psychologically impossible; even passive observation involves selective attention driven by preference.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Aesthetic pleasure may differ from appetite-satisfaction but remains continuous with ordinary pleasure rather than categorically distinct.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Aesthetic contemplation of beauty involves losing self-interest; we admire a landscape without wanting to possess or use it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Willing and desire are always goal-directed toward future satisfaction, but aesthetic experience is absorbed in present perception.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Calling aesthetic states 'pleasant' conflates them with bodily gratification, obscuring their distinct contemplative nature.
?
How convincing is this?
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.