02.09.2013 Views

stankovic, sasa thesis.pdf - Atrium - University of Guelph

stankovic, sasa thesis.pdf - Atrium - University of Guelph

stankovic, sasa thesis.pdf - Atrium - University of Guelph

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

not legislate as determining judgment. Instead, judgment legislates as reflective judgment.<br />

Therefore legislation takes on a new meaning. The reflective judgment expresses the free and<br />

indeterminate accord between all the faculties. In this sense, that the reflected judgment<br />

legislates in the faculty <strong>of</strong> feeling means that all the faculties in their free and indeterminate<br />

accord legislate in the faculty <strong>of</strong> feeling. “This latter case is very different from the other two:<br />

aesthetic judgement is reflective; it does not legislate over objects, but only over itself; it does<br />

not express a determination <strong>of</strong> an object under a determining faculty, but a free accord <strong>of</strong> all the<br />

faculties…” (KCP 61). This is the harmony that we have been looking for: the aesthetic common<br />

sense. “Here, then, is an accord between the imagination as free and understanding as<br />

indeterminate. It is a free and indeterminate accord between faculties. This agreement defines a<br />

properly aesthetic common sense (taste)” (KCP 49).<br />

How can there be a free accord between the faculties? How can there be aesthetic<br />

common sense? “It would seem that Kant runs up against a formidable difficulty. We have seen<br />

that he rejected the idea <strong>of</strong> a pre-established harmony between subject and object; substituting<br />

the principle <strong>of</strong> a necessary submission <strong>of</strong> the object to the subject itself. But does he not once<br />

again come up with the idea <strong>of</strong> harmony, simply transposed to the level <strong>of</strong> faculties <strong>of</strong> the subject<br />

which differ in nature?” (KCP 22). It is important to recognize the reason why this question is<br />

confused. “The previous two Critiques begin with ready-made faculties, and these enter<br />

determinative relations and take on organized tasks under the direction <strong>of</strong> one legislative faculty”<br />

(KCP 68). However, the opposite is true here. That an interest <strong>of</strong> reason does not correspond to<br />

the faculty <strong>of</strong> feeling, in other words, that the faculty <strong>of</strong> feeling is disinterested and does not<br />

legislate over objects that are subject to it, in other words, that there is no legislating faculty in<br />

the faculty <strong>of</strong> feeling in the second sense just means that faculties are not determined. Therefore<br />

156

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!