Critique of Judgment

The Critique of Judgment (CJ ) is Immanuel Kant's third major work on the Critique of Pure Reason and the Critique of Practical Reason, published in 1790. Contains in a first part of Kant's aesthetics (the study of aesthetic judgment ) and in the second part of the teleology ( teaching of the interpretation of nature by means of the purpose categories).

• 3.1 Hegel
• 3.2 Current Reception

Position in the work

Kant's intention - set out extensively in the introductions to KdU - was to mediate between nature to be made in this third criticism ( the subject of theoretical reason ) and freedom ( object of practical reason) and so to complete the building of the critical philosophy. This idea of completing the Kantian system architecture will be held today outside the Special Research only slight echo.

The third criticism is closely related to the two previous works of the critique of reason. For Kant, the philosophy initially fell apart after that in two areas: a theoretical ( pure reason ) and a practical (ethics, law, philosophy of religion ). Thus, the sensual and the moral world, nature and freedom and not immediate ( unforgiving ) standing side by side, it requires a mediator to bridge the gap, a "bridge" between sensuality and morality, because freedom will be convenient to unfold in the world of sense. This mediation is the power of judgment, which generally recognizes the special for Kant.

The third criticism is not only to mediate between nature and freedom, but it also tries to phenomena such as the beautiful in nature and art, the genius, the organic and the systematic unity of nature to clarify, with the concept of judgment.

The judgment has two forms: a determinant and reflective. The determining power of judgment subsumes something special under a given law or regulation, while reflecting to find the given particular the universal. (A24 )

For Kant, the usefulness is the central term that refers to the power of reflective judgment and its mediation between nature and freedom. Is something considered to be appropriate, considering the phenomena as a whole and goes from one end of the whole of. The purposiveness of nature for Kant is the a priori assumed expectation that structured nature and not messy to be found.

Content

In the first part of Kant first analyzed the specificity of judgments of taste. They are a) aesthetic, not logical, b ) without interest, c ) work without concepts and purpose ideas and claim a special form of universality.

Taste

In his critical reasons of aesthetics Kant examines the validity claim of aesthetic judgments. Who was capable of aesthetic judgments about the Beautiful, evidence taste. Judgments of taste are subjective and empirically to a particular case, a landscape, based a work of art: " The judgment of taste is therefore not a cognitive judgment, and consequently not logical, but aesthetical, by which is meant one whose determining ground can not be other than subjective. "

Subjective universality

Although judgments of taste are not provable, they (not "The picture is beautiful ": " The picture is nice for me " ) claim to be generally endorsed by, that are aimed at a general validity and are formulated accordingly. They claim universal validity, inasmuch as they are " the good pleasure in an object anyone ansinne (s) ... "

In contrast to scientific and moral statements have aesthetic judgments for Kant no objective, but a subjective universality. As in the previous critical works takes Kant here a middle position between rationalist and sensationalist positions. From the aesthetics of Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten, who saw a low form of recognition in judgments of taste, he distances himself from the like of Edmund Burke, who attributed this to a mere feeling.

The Beautiful and the Sublime

Kant distinguishes in the analytical part of the CJ, which is dedicated to the aesthetics, between the beautiful and the sublime. Both are themselves divided into free beauty and trailing beauty or the mathematical sublime and the dynamic sublime. As a rough comparison can make the following distinctions:

The genius

Kant follows in his theory of art practice is no longer the old principle imitation ( mimesis ) as it was yet represented eg by Baumgarten, but puts the creative process into the subject. However, this does not mean that from now speak of itself bring forth from man made objects of art, but the genius is provided with a natural talent, which gives him a great imagination and originality. The genius is not a social being, but rather a natural being who lives in society. So Kant 's view, the natural means of the genius of art its rules. (Schneider, p 51)

Effect

Hegel

• Regarding Kant's analysis of teleology:

It is significant, firstly, that Kant introduces a sharp distinction between objective knowledge and subjective judgments in the Critique of Judgment: so only been made ​​in the Critique of Pure Reason concepts of the understanding can give us objective knowledge, however, the judgment is linked with the idea of a purpose. "Purpose," but is, according to Kant, is not an objective judgment, which zukomme things, but only one set of the judgment in things property - regarding the idea of a final cause, Kant says: " We put, they say, final causes into things and they do not raise it were from their perception out. " (CJ, p 33, or p 194) from Hegel and Kant's contemporaries, this was not considered a problem, since with the observation of an organism, eg an animal, in their view, very well find this organism could be an objective purpose, so the animal 's purpose was in fact in itself. In contrast, there appeared to them implausible to assume that this yet so obvious fact is merely a useful feature of our judgment.

For this problem area out then later Hegel should develop his dialectic, which has the aim to avoid this problem. Although eligible for Hegel added other motives, however, is a historic point of reference in this case plausible. To avoid the inconsistencies described above, Hegel identified the usefulness with the organism. (. Instead of " organism " you could also say " concept " because a term is coming to Hegel only organisms ) It couples Hegel introduced in the KdU of Kant notion of an intuitive understanding of: it can perceive its objects clearly, so it is do not rely on conceptual operations and thus clearly recognizes the structure of the organism. For Hegel, as indeed Kant " The terms of the inner expediency ( ..) the idea revived at all, and in particular of life" has, however, since he immunity they had no objective content is not exhausted its potential. In contrast, Hegel asserts that one " can only be regarded as being really, or in truth, to which there is a term, and the only that has a term which can be interpreted according to the pattern of an organism. " ( Emundts / S. Horstmann 72)

Current reception

Kant's analysis of the aesthetic excited to now great interest and has been widely applied fruitfully to the understanding of modern art. It includes the aspects

• Regarded the beautiful as " disinterested pleasure " without conceptual appropriation of the object
• The paradoxical status of the judgment of taste as subjective and generalized
• The aesthetic experience as a free play of cognitive faculties, sensibility and understanding
• The analysis of the sublime