Critique of Judgment ePUB ☆ Critique of ePUB Ì


Critique of Judgment I ve previously reviewed both The Critique of Pure Reason and The Critique of Practical Reason, describing some of the reasons why the reading of the three critiques led to what might be called a conversion experience or perhaps an intellectual mystical or jnana experience.For one who has sedulously studied Kant, the third critique is a kind of capstone as it brings a lot of loose threads of his arguments together in a rather ecstatically inspiring manner I certainly experienced a kind of inte I ve previously reviewed both The Critique of Pure Reason and The Critique of Practical Reason, describing some of the reasons why the reading of the three critiques led to what might be called a conversion experience or perhaps an intellectual mystical or jnana experience.For one who has sedulously studied Kant, the third critique is a kind of capstone as it brings a lot of loose threads of his arguments together in a rather ecstatically inspiring manner I certainly experienced a kind of intellectual ecstasy, repeatedly, during the course of this study a process which involved most of a summer sitting from eight to fourteen hours a day at the Hungarian Pastry Shop at Cathedral and 110th St and which included reading a number of his ancillary works as well as the magisterial commentary of the first critique by an early translator, Norman Kemp Smith.A rather cheap way to get at the point of the third critique would be for someone informed by the Christian tradition to read his Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone If you like the Jesus of the gospels as opposed to the Jesus of Revelation you will find that to be similarly inspiring, a relatively quick rush Unfortunately, however, that apologetic does not have the compelling force of the detailed definition and argumentation of the three critiques You ll have the rush, but it will pass.And what is the point of the Critical project Well, of course there are many points which you ll find described pretty clearly in the book description appended under the list of contents to this edition, but the real point is what that much edited Wikipedia writer refers to in his concluding remark about Fichte et alia Kant was basically a mystic, even a metaphysician, but muchcareful about it than his antimetaphysical successor Nietzsche This seems a contradiction to the programme of the first critique It is, but The Critique of Pure Reason simply lays the groundwork for the two following books We are, so far as we operate as rational beings, Logos incarnate the book I most respect and least enjoyed reading This is probably my favorite of Kant s three critiques Pure and Practical Reason being the other two However, when it comes to reading Kant, saying favorite is not quite right he was such a bad writer, and such a brilliant thinker, its hard to deal with some times In any case, this is very interesting because he looks at judgment as a reflective action, both concerning objects of art that are beautiful or sublime, and teleological reflection in nature. Isn t this, like, one of the most important books on philosophical aesthetics or something No one told me that Kant actually tries to tell jokes in it most of it is not jokes, though, and even the jokes aren t really that funny I feel like for me to rate this book would be ridiculous, so I am not doing that. It would be difficult to overstate Kant s importance, or the greatness of his three critiques, which must be understood as three parts of one unified project, and, I should add, must be read in sequence European thought still operates within the horizons that Kant demarcated, and as a matter of intellectual history alone, I regard Kant as one of the greatest and most significant thinkers of our world s heritage As regards to his philosophy, it is fundamental to our conception of what philosoph It would be difficult to overstate Kant s importance, or the greatness of his three critiques, which must be understood as three parts of one unified project, and, I should add, must be read in sequence European thought still operates within the horizons that Kant demarcated, and as a matter of intellectual history alone, I regard Kant as one of the greatest and most significant thinkers of our world s heritage As regards to his philosophy, it is fundamental to our conception of what philosophy is, in the same way that Bach and Beethoven tell us what it means to make music In his previous critiques, Kant has analyzed the true what can we know with certainty and the good what ought I to do , thereby addressing two members of Plato s holy trinity of good, the true, and the beautiful In the third critique, Kant turns his attention to beauty, and in his analysis of aesthetics, he discerns a curious characteristic regarding the manner in which humans perceive and articulate aesthetic judgments they regard their determinations of beauty as not merely expressions of personal taste, but as somehow binding for all people In his reading, we do not regard a sunset as merely beautiful for us, but prereflexively believe that anyone who sees a sunset must take it to be beautiful In analyzing how it is that we posit aesthetic judgments as somehowthan merely subjective expressions of taste, Kant finds that there is no basis for an a priori determination of beauty through either reason or the understanding That is to say, we cannot posit a universally binding determination of beauty on the basis of a priori synthetic reasoning the subject of his first critique , or on the basis of practical norms that must be voluntarily affirmed by all rational agents the subject of his second critique In short, this points to a new faculty of human consciousness that demands its own account, which he will call judgment There is a lot that one could object to in this account For example, one could ask if we are not simply mistaken in thinking that our judgments of beauty have any kind of binding force this objection certainly occurred to me, along with many others But I came to conclude in my reading of this work that its value lies not on the level of detail or minutia When one steps back and brings his larger purpose into view, the power of his argument and analysis becomes clear In this case, what Kant is pointing to is that there are some judgments that we perceive to be stronger than mere expressions of opinion, but which cannot be deduced in the same way that we can derive geometry, for example, from various regularities in how all conscious beings perceive space and time Ultimately, I believe what he is intuiting is an early prototype of systems thinking, and this is only the first point in this book where I would be powerfully reminded of complexity theory and self organization More on that later For now, suffice to say that I believe Kant is absolutely right in saying there are kinds of judgments which are not merely subjective, but are intersubjective In some deep sense, they are deliberations that emerge through the interaction of many individual subjects, and they are not reducible to the sum of individual determinations of taste, just as the movements of a flock of starlings only emerge from the whole acting in conscious, coordinated motion with one another And I would also agree that aesthetic judgments are on this order I would submit that there are expressions of taste that are so misguided as to verge on being factually wrong if someone argues, for example, that the Twilight novels are better written than Proust s In Search of Lost Time, saying I disagree with that opinion, does not really encompass the scope of my disagreement And I agree with Kant that the basis for that determination ultimately lies in the fact that judgments of taste are not altogether individual, but are made in coordinated movement with the social groups in which we are embedded, and in that sense are emergent, and transpersonal In a key passage, Kant argues that one basis for an intersubjective character in aesthetic judgments lies in the fact that we are all humans with similar cognitive and perceptual faculties, and that it is a fundamental law of intelligibility that we assume other conscious agents are basically like us I absolutely agree there would be no possibility of understanding speech if we could not assume that when someone says I want a cookie, we know exactly what they mean without further elaboration In a move that cements this work as one of inspired genius, Kant then applies his analysis of human judgment to the domain of teleology, arguing that our determinations that certain things are for some purpose is a judgment of the same faculty an intersubjective judgment that is not merely our personal opinion Teleological judgments operate in the same weird gray area as aesthetic judgments evenso On the one hand, we cannot establish on the basis of pure reason that teeth, regarded as mere objects of experience, are for biting and chewing, nor can we be satisfied to say that the determination that they are for biting and chewing is merely our opinion Something else is going on here This is where Kant s book got really exciting for me, and where I believe his work most anticipates systems theory His analysis of things as functional wholes finds that objects of experience must be perceived as organic totalities in order to be perceived as purposive, and this strongly relates to how, for example, the biologist Stuart Kauffman explains self organization as a driver of evolution The point that Kauffman and many others make is that individual organisms do not merely evolve as individuals, their populations evolve as well, because selective pressures operate at multiple levels of analysis The objects of nature that we regard as purposive do show qualities of emergence that is, behaviors that are irreducible to the sum of the individual acts of their component parts and this phenomenon has been well described by many branches of science in the last fifty years See, for example, Ilya Prigogine s work on complexity Kant associates our judgment of purposiveness with our sense that many objects of nature and many natural systems appear to us to function as if by design This leads him to something like a theory of intelligent design, but to his enormous credit, he carefully maintains that we cannot take the appearance of design by intelligence as proof for such an origin, and admits that there may be physical processes at work that can account for purposiveness in nature that are simply unknown to the sciences of his day There are specifically, the sciences of self organization and selective adaptation can account empirically and mathematically for many of the phenomena that he is quite right to be baffled by In the absence of an explanatory mechanism for how the coordinated evolution of complex structures can occur without direction, it is in fact quite rational to ask how on earth a cat could have an eye that sees, if natural systems merely unfold mechanically, driven by the law of entropy There were quite rational grounds for arguing for the existence of God prior to the development of better explanatory systems to account for purposiveness in natural systems Kant concludes the critique with a long appendix on theology which I found completely without value, and one of the most boring things I ve encountered in his entire corpus Most people will probably have heard of this book principally for its discussion of the sublime, which you may notice I have not mentioned yet It is an interesting argument that would have some special relevance for the Romantics in particular, but compared to what I regard as the primary value of this work, I found it relatively unimportant For people generally interested in aesthetics or the roots of Romanticism, I would not recommend this book If you are not committed to Kant s larger project, then you will surely be repelled by this work Even for someone steeped in philosophy, it is not easy reading.For those who are interested in Kant s philosophy per se, I cannot recommend this book highly enough It is critical to understanding his complete system, and I found it farinteresting and powerful than his much better known writings on moral philosophy To such readers, I would advise you to be sure you read the other two critiques first they form a continuous and sequential argument Whist I have to admit I had to read this for study, I m phenomenally glad that I did It s horribly impenetrable, though Very, very hard work to get through, let alone digest Do I understand Kant No, not really Can I talk about him and his ideas comfortably Well, yes, kind of Would I recommend this Not as light reading, or for fun If you want to understand Kant, there are faraccessible works by better writers explaining him This is a brilliant work, although it is somewhat mis titled Kant spendstime with teleology than with judgement, although the two are related Here he clears the ground for teleological thinking as a whole In a direct way, Kant is speaking of ideology through teleology as a point of caption for a logical system He clearly separates this from the suprasensible point of caption and yet with the sublime Kant locates the Other as being the source of this teleological purpose He closes the This is a brilliant work, although it is somewhat mis titled Kant spendstime with teleology than with judgement, although the two are related Here he clears the ground for teleological thinking as a whole In a direct way, Kant is speaking of ideology through teleology as a point of caption for a logical system He clearly separates this from the suprasensible point of caption and yet with the sublime Kant locates the Other as being the source of this teleological purpose He closes the immanent phenomenological world through the pragmatic teleological point to denote purpose from a certain view And then he reproduces this structure with the suprasensible through the single design of the Other.It is of course, a Lacanian Zizek notice that the Other is always defined as a reflective projection of the subject, so that the subject can be absorbed into a greater magnitude of purposefulness.One wonders what Kant would have been able to do had he been able to think outside the parameters of God God is necessary to his time, and he had to include God somehow Kant s insistence that the deployment of individual morality is a sign of a larger design God is interesting We can find concordance with this concept through Hegel, Heidigger and others who would speak of an absolute meaningfulness knowledge and purpose founded on the position of an Other.While I agree heartily with Kant s denotation of the limitations of reason without desire, without pragmatic organization, it seems that he can t help but invert that structure for its own use in order to violate the terms by which he notes as being transcendental illusions I would speculate that this is a necessary affect of trying to find meaning, in that he has to provide a singular domain for us all to collectively interact otherwise he would risk losing the very thing he seeks to capture, that of a role of reason and thought as the highest forms of concordance and social stability.Nietzsche would suggest that this is part of the problem of philosophers, that they seek to be teachers and thus are left with a latent content that enables stability of identity, forcing incoherencies to occur in what is otherwise unthinkably incoherent inconsistent I agree Kant s attempt is valiant here but ultimately centered around human subjectivity, undeniably so, because it must be so presented for him to advance as he did With this last critique, Kant presents in many ways, the seed for all modern inconsistency and reason with Godel, Turing and Russell He presents the archetype of ideological state appratuses that Althusser and Foucault would present as logically singular points of consideration founded on nothing but its own purposefulness and in this manner, we still live in Kants shadow as he outlined the very structures and their limitations so that others later on could verify the same problems in countless different ways.We shall not leave Kant s shadow if we do not avoid the distinctions of method first presented by Descartes as being the nature of rational consistency Kant does extend this rationality by demonstrating how sublime marks can organize what would seem like an unorganizable system of consistency For this reason, Kant s Critiques are very well worth the read In THE CRITIQUE OF JUDGMENT, Immanuel Kant seeks to establish the a priori principles underlying the faculty of judgment, just as he did in his previous critiques of pure and practical reason The first part deals with the subject of our aesthetic sensibility we respond to certain natural phenomena as beautiful, says Kant, when we recognize in nature a harmonious order that satisfies the mind s own need for order The second half of the critique concentrates on the apparent teleology in nature s design of organisms Kant argues that our minds are inclined to see purpose and order in nature and this is the main principle underlying all of our judgments Although this might imply a super sensible Designer, Kant insists that we cannot prove a supernatural dimension or the existence of God Such considerations are beyond reason and are solely the province of faith I don t have the time to read ALL of this Got through half study related Fucking awesome, even though the process initially was like hitting your head repeatedly with a brick The bloke has neither poetry nor humour He does, however, have very rich ideas, and it s worth reading because of that Kant is hella difficult to read.read PART of this for a class a class taught by the same guy who edited and was lead translator for this edition of the book basically, the class was only SLIGHTLYintelligible than the book.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *