The Strengths of Kant’s Philosophy of Art

  • Mary A. McCloskey

Abstract

Whereas Kant’s account of beauty in nature is to be compared with formalist theories of beauty such as those advanced by Plato in Philebus and Hogarth in the Analysis of Beauty, Kant’s philosophy of art is best compared with expressionist theories of art such as the theories of Croce and Collingwood. It therefore enhances one’s conception of the strengths of Kant’s position to see how his theory fares when confronted with the difficulties and objections which affect their theories. Since Collingwood’s is the more fully worked out theory of the two I address my discussion mainly to Collingwood.

Keywords

Production Line Metaphor Shoe 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 1.
    Collingwood, Principles of Art, p. 151.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ibid., p. 139.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ibid., p. 151; see also p. 111.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wollheim, Arts and Its Objects, pp. 34–5.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Collingwood, Principles of Art, p. 142.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ibid., pp. 141–2.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ibid., p. 24.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, pp. 162–6; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §§43, 44, p. 303, line 5-p.306, line 10.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, p. 69; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §15, p. 226, lines 31–2.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, pp. 33, 69; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, Einleitung viii, p. 192, lines 16–23; §15, p. 226, lines 24–30.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, p. 166; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §44, p. 306, lines 3–5.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, p. 163; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §43, p. 303, line 34-p. 304, line 1.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, p. 163; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §43, p. 303, lines 32–4.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §43, footnote to p. 304 (Reading Tachenspieler as card-trickster. Translated by J. T. J. Srzednicki.)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Collingwood, Principles of Art, p. 18.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ibid., p. 18.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ibid., p. 20.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ibid., p. 139.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, pp. 31, 65, 66, 151; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, Einleitung vii, p. 190, lines 13–19; §13, p. 223, lines 15–25; pp. 223–6; §40, p. 293, line 30-p. 294, line 8.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Collingwood, Principles of Art, p. 142.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, pp. 183–90; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §51, p. 320, line 10-p.325, line 21.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, pp. 164, 171; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §43, p. 304, lines 17–25; §47, p. 310, lines 6–11.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ludwig Wittgenstein, Lectures and Conversations on Aesthetics and Psycho-Analysis (New York, 1968) p. 34.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ibid., p. 34.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ibid., p. 34.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Meredith, Aesthetic Judgement, p. 164; Kant’s gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5, §43, p. 304, line 19–21.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Mary A. McCloskey 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary A. McCloskey

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations