British Journal of Aesthetics 48 (2):205-228 (2008)
|Abstract||A number of recent studies have claimed to explain how Kant can or cannot accommodate pure judgements of ugliness in his aesthetic theory. In this paper I critically review the arguments on each side of the debate and then develop a new account of how Kant might explain the pure judgement of the ugly, namely, by appeal to the quickening of the faculties in their harmonious free play. Some implications and applications of such an explanation are then explored, including a rethink of the nature of beauty and ugliness. CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Hannah Ginsborg (2003). Aesthetic Judging and the Intentionality of Pleasure. Inquiry 46 (2):164 – 181.
Garrett Thomson (1992). Kant's Problems with Ugliness. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 50 (2):107-115.
Paul Guyer (1992). Thomson's Problems with Kant: A Comment on "Kant's Problems with Ugliness". Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 50 (4):317-319.
Theodore A. Gracyk (1986). Sublimity, Ugliness, and Formlessness in Kant's Aesthetic Theory. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 45 (1):49-56.
Nick Zangwill, Aesthetic Judgment. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
James Phillips (2011). Placing Ugliness in Kant's Third Critique : A Reply to Paul Guyer. Kant-Studien 102 (3):385-395.
Christian Helmut Wenzel (2009). Kant's Aesthetics: Overview and Recent Literature. Philosophy Compass 4 (3):380-406.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #78,584 of 549,013 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,261 of 549,013 )
How can I increase my downloads?