Abstract
Although it may seem self-serving to say so, I think it altogether appropriate that a discussion of Thomas Reid’s significance in the history of aesthetics be included in a conference commemorating the bicentenary of the Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man. Because Reid, I shall argue, represents a very important ‘first’ in the history of aesthetics; and it is in the Essays on the Intellectual Powers that that ‘first’ is first achieved.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
F.N. Sibley, ‘Analysing Seeing,’ in Sibley (ed.) (1971), p. 81.
Hutcheson (1973), p. 34 (I, ix).
Ibid., p. 47 (II, xiv).
Principally in my book (1976); and my recent article (1984), p. 247.
Michael (1984), p. 247.
I am not the first to see an evolution in Hutcheson’s views on various topics. See for example, Scott (1900).
I have spelled out Hume’s views in this regard more fully than I have time to do here in my (1984), pp. 198–208.
Hume (1978), pp. 585 (III, iii, 1), and 363 (II, ii, 5).
Hume (1975), p. 173 (I).
See Hume (1978), p. 617 (III, iii, 5).
David Hume, ‘Of the Standard of Taste’, in Hume (1963), pp. 245–246.
Reid (1973), p. 37.
Reid did recognize, too, the category of “novelty” in works of art and other aesthetic objects, as had others before him. But it did not interest him, nor play much of a role in his position on aesthetic perception, just because it was a relative notion. What is new to one man, may not be so to another; what is new this moment, may be familiar to the same person some time hence, IP, VIII, ii (Works, pp. 493–494). Not being a ‘property’, it was not subject to Reid’s ‘critique’ of taste, and was thus dismissed as “but a slight impression upon a truly correct taste”.
Ibid.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kivy, P. (1989). Seeing (And so Forth) is Believing (Among Other Things); On the Significance of Reid in the History of Aesthetics. In: Dalgarno, M., Matthews, E. (eds) The Philosophy of Thomas Reid. Philosophical Studies Series, vol 42. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2338-6_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2338-6_19
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7552-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-2338-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive