These selections come from a portion of the Critique of Judgment where Kant interweaves discussions of two related topics, for which he uses the labels “genius” and “aesthetic ideas.” Each of these constitutes a link between Kant and philosophers of the next century who we will go on to read. This assignment directs you to passages where he is focusing on the former; we’ll look at his discussion of the latter topic after spring break.
You will need to follow both the sections and the pages noted above to identify the specific passages we will discuss. When reading them, you should both think about Kant’s distinction between genius and taste and compare Kant’s idea to the neoplatonic idea of inspiration as divine madness (following Plato’s Phaedrus). Kant’s claim that “nature gives the rule to art” through genius (§46, HK 314) is hard to interpret; try to think of a couple different ways of understanding it.
Although we will not be considering the passages where Kant focuses attention on what he calls “aesthetic ideas,” he will use the term occasionally in his discussion of genius. You can find a summary account of what he means by it in the middle of p. 320 (opposite the beginning of the second part of this assignment). The key features of an aesthetic idea is that it is not associated with a definite concept and has imaginative content that goes beyond what could be captured by a definite concept. At least one of the things Kant seems to have in mind is a rich metaphor.
Probably the most natural issue for us to discuss is Kant’s claims about the relation between taste and genius, specifically that, while genius is closely associated with “beautiful art,” it is taste that is the fundamental requirement. (See the end of §48, HK 317, and §50, HK 322.) Ask yourself which of the two you take to be more important for the fine arts and why.
Finally, here are a couple of notes to help with some specific points in the reading.
• The plural of the term translated here as “beautiful art” (on, for example, HK 313) is the standard German translation of the French “beaux arts,” whose translation in English is “fine arts.” This phrase became common currency only in Kant’s century, so it isn’t entirely clear whether he has in mind a particular group of arts or the general idea of an art aiming at beauty (rather than at a practical value, as do “useful arts” like shoemaking).
• The following revision of the translation of the first two sentences of the second full paragraph on HK 317 fits better with what Kant says elsewhere.
But taste is merely a judging and not a productive faculty, and what is appropriate conforms to it is therefore not therefore a work of beautiful art. It can only be a product belonging to useful and mechanical art or even to science, produced according to definite rules that can be learned and must be exactly followed.