Critique of Judgment

by Immanuel Kant. Translated By J. H. Bernard

• ISBN13: 9780486445434
• ISBN10: 0486445437
• Format: Paperback
• Copyright: 2005-09-21
• Publisher: Dover Publications

Summary

Kant's attempt to establish the principles behind the faculty of judgment remains one of the most important works on human reason. This third of the philosopher's threeCritiquesforms the very basis of modern aesthetics by establishing the almost universally accepted framework for debate of aesthetic issues.

Table of Contents

Editor's Introduction	ix
Preface	1	(4)
Introduction	5	(22)
I. Of the division of Philosophy	5	(2)
II. Of the realm of Philosophy in general	7	(2)
III. Of the Critique of Judgment as a means of combining the two parts of Philosophy into a whole	9	(2)
IV. Of Judgment as a faculty legislating a priori	11	(2)
V. The principle of the formal purposiveness of nature is a transcendental principle of Judgment	13	(4)
VI. Of the combination of the feeling of pleasure with the concept of the purposiveness of nature	17	(2)
VII. Of the aesthetical representation of the purposiveness of nature	19	(3)
VIII. Of the logical representation of the purposiveness of nature	22	(2)
IX. Of the connexion of the legislation of Understanding with that of Reason by means of the Judgment	24	(3)
First Part: Critique of the Aesthetical Judgment	27	(126)
FIRST DIVISION: Analytic of the Aesthetical Judgment	27	(110)
FIRST BOOK: Analytic of the Beautiful	27	(34)
First Moment of the judgment of taste, according to quality	27	(6)
§1. The judgment of taste is aesthetical	27	(1)
§2. The satisfaction which determines the judgment of taste is disinterested	28	(1)
§3. The satisfaction in the pleasant is bound up with interest	29	(1)
§4. The satisfaction in the good is bound up with interest	30	(2)
§5. Comparison of the three specifically different kinds of satisfaction	32	(1)
Second Moment of the judgment of taste, viz. according to quantity	33	(7)
§6. The Beautiful is that which apart from concepts is represented as the object of a universal satisfaction	33	(1)
§7. Comparison of the Beautiful with the Pleasant and the Good by means of the above characteristic	34	(1)
§8. The universality of the satisfaction is represented in a judgment of Taste only as subjective	35	(3)
§9. Investigation of the question whether in the judgment of taste the feeling of pleasure precedes or follows the judging of the object	38	(2)
Third Moment of judgments of taste, according to the relation of the purposes which are brought into consideration therein	40	(14)
§10. Of purposiveness in general	40	(1)
§11. The judgment of taste has nothing at its basis but the form of the purposiveness of an object (or of its mode of representation)	41	(1)
§12. The judgment of taste rests on a priori grounds	42	(1)
§13. The pure judgment of taste is independent of charm and emotion	43	(1)
§14. Elucidation by means of examples	43	(3)
§15. The judgment of taste is quite independent of the concept of perfection	46	(2)
§16. The judgment of taste, by which an object is declared to be beautiful under the condition of a definite concept, is not pure	48	(2)
§17. Of the Ideal of Beauty	50	(4)
Fourth Moment of the judgment of taste, according to the modality of the satisfaction in the object	54	(3)
§18. What the modality in a judgment of taste is	54	(1)
§19. The subjective necessity, which we ascribe to the judgment of taste, is conditioned	55	(1)
§20. The condition of necessity which a judgment of taste asserts is the Idea of a common sense	55	(1)
§21. Have we ground for presupposing a common sense?	56	(1)
§22. The necessity of the universal agreement that is thought in a judgment of taste is a subjective necessity, which is represented as objective under the presupposition of a common sense	56	(1)
General remark on the first section of the Analytic	57	(4)
SECOND BOOK: Analytic of the Sublime	61	(76)
§23. Transition from the faculty which judges of the Beautiful to that which judges of the Sublime	61	(2)
§24. Of the divisions of an investigation into the feeling of the sublime	63	(1)
A. Of the Mathematically Sublime	64	(10)
§25. Explanation of the term "sublime"	64	(2)
§26. Of that estimation of the magnitude of natural things which is requisite for the Idea of the Sublime	66	(5)
§27. Of the quality of the satisfaction in our judgments upon the Sublime	71	(3)
B. Of the Dynamically Sublime in Nature	74	(5)
§28. Of Nature regarded as Might	74	(3)
§29. Of the modality of the judgment upon the sublime in nature	77	(2)
General remark upon the exposition of the aesthetical reflective Judgment	79	(11)
Deduction of [pure] aesthetical judgments	90	(47)
§30. The Deduction of aesthetical judgments on the objects of nature must not be directed to what we call Sublime in nature, but only to the Beautiful	90	(1)
§31. Of the method of deduction of judgments of Taste	91	(1)
§32. First peculiarity of the judgment of Taste	92	(2)
§33. Second peculiarity of the judgment of Taste	94	(1)
§34. There is no objective principle of Taste possible	95	(1)
§35. The principle of Taste is the subjective principle of Judgment in general	96	(1)
§36. Of the problem of a Deduction of judgments of Taste	97	(1)
§37. What is properly asserted a priori of an object in a judgment of Taste	98	(1)
§38. Deduction of judgments of Taste	98	(2)
§39. Of the communicability of a sensation	100	(1)
§40. Of Taste as a kind of sensus communis	101	(2)
§41. Of the empirical interest in the Beautiful	103	(2)
§42. Of the intellectual interest in the Beautiful	105	(4)
§43. Of Art in general	109	(1)
§44. Of beautiful Art	110	(1)
§45. Beautiful Art is an art, in so far as it seems like nature	111	(1)
§46. Beautiful Art is the art of genius	112	(1)
§47. Elucidation and confirmation of the above explanation of Genius	113	(2)
§48. Of the relation of Genius to Taste	115	(2)
§49. Of the faculties of the mind that constitute Genius	117	(5)
§50. Of the combination of Taste with Genius in the products of beautiful Art	122	(1)
§51. Of the division of the beautiful arts	123	(4)
§52. Of the combination of beautiful arts in one and the same product	127	(1)
§53. Comparison of the respective aesthetical worth of the beautiful arts	128	(3)
§54. Remark	131	(6)
SECOND DIVISION: Dialectic of the Aesthetical Judgment	137	(16)
§55.	137	(1)
§56. Representation of the antimony of Taste	137	(1)
§57. Solution of the antinomy of Taste	138	(6)
§58. Of the Idealism of the purposiveness of both nature and Art as the unique principle of the aesthetical Judgment	144	(4)
§59. Of Beauty as the symbol of Morality	148	(3)
§60. Appendix: Of the method of Taste	151	(2)
Second Part: Critique of the Teleological Judgment	153	(45)
§61. Of the objective purposiveness of Nature	153	(2)
FIRST DIVISION: Analytic of the Teleological Judgment	155	(18)
§62. Of the objective purposiveness which is merely formal as distinguished from that which is material	155	(3)
§63. Of the relative, as distinguished from the inner, purposiveness of nature	158	(3)
§64. Of the peculiar character of things as natural purposes	161	(2)
§65. Things regarded as natural purposes are organised beings	163	(3)
§66. Of the principle of judging of internal purposiveness in organised beings	166	(1)
§67. Of the principle of the teleological judging of nature in general as a system of purposes	167	(3)
§68. Of the principle of Teleology as internal principle of natural science	170	(3)
SECOND DIVISION: Dialectic of the Teleological Judgment	173	(25)
§69. What is an antinomy of the Judgment?	173	(1)
§70. Representation of this antinomy	174	(1)
§71. Preliminary to the solution of the above antinomy	175	(1)
§72. Of the different systems which deal with the purposiveness of nature	176	(2)
§73. None of the above systems give what they pretend	178	(3)
§74. The reason that we cannot treat the concept of a Technic of nature dogmatically is the fact that a natural purpose is inexplicable	181	(2)
§75. The concept of an objective purposiveness of nature is a critical principle of Reason for the reflective Judgment	183	(2)
§76. Remark	185	(3)
§77. Of the peculiarity of the human Understanding, by means of which the concept of a natural purpose is possible	188	(5)
§78. Of the union of the principle of the universal mechanism of matter with the teleological principle in the Technic of nature	193	(5)
Appendix: Methodology of the Teleological Judgment	198	(46)
§79. Whether teleology must be treated as if it belonged to the doctrine of nature	198	(1)
§80. Of the necessary subordination of the mechanical to the teleological principle in the explanation of a thing as a natural purpose	199	(3)
§81. Of the association of mechanism with the teleological principle in the explanation of a natural purpose as a natural product	202	(3)
§82. Of the teleological system in the external relations of organised beings	205	(4)
§83. Of the ultimate purpose of nature as a teleological system	209	(3)
§84. Of the final purpose of the existence of a world, i.e. of creation itself	212	(2)
§85. Of Physico-theology	214	(5)
§86. Of Ethico-theology	219	(4)
§87. Of the moral proof of the Being of God	223	(4)
§88. Limitation of the validity of the moral proof	227	(5)
§89. Of the use of the moral argument	232	(1)
§90. Of the kind of belief in a teleological proof of the Being of God	233	(5)
§91. Of the kind of belief produced by a practical faith	238	(6)
General remarks on Teleology	244