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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The free play of imagination and understanding does not r... — Carmelics
    Home/Aesthetics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→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.

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

    Aesthetics
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Aesthetics

    Related

    Pleasure in a beautiful object can be independent of subsumption under any deter...Pleasure in a beautiful object is an expression of the free play of the cognitiv...The cognitive faculties of imagination and understanding work the same way in ev...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Aesthetics
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    What cannot be grasped in a determinate concept stimulates free play a...90%Pleasure in a beautiful object can be independent of subsumption under...82%We experience a beautiful object as having a kind of unity ordinarily ...76%Moritz concludes that aesthetic judgments cannot be grounded in determ...72%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: aesthetics-18th-german
    View source passageHide passage
    Starting from the claim that Francis Hutcheson had made in 1725 and Mendelssohn reintroduced in 1785, Kant begins his analysis of the judgment of taste, that is, our claim that a particular object is beautiful, from the premise that our pleasure in a beautiful object occurs independently of any interest in the existence of the object as physiologically agreeable (CPJ, §3, 5:205–7) or as good for some purpose expressed by a determinate concept of utility or morality (CPJ, §4, 5:207–9). But neithe

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective