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.

supposition would be impossible without some sort <strong>of</strong> intervention from the understanding”<br />

(KCP 48). This is why the aesthetic judgment ‘this is beautiful’ is not an objective but is rather a<br />

subjective judgment. “Aesthetic common sense does not represent an objective accord <strong>of</strong> the<br />

faculties (that is, a subjection <strong>of</strong> objects to a dominant faculty which would simultaneously<br />

determine the role <strong>of</strong> the other faculties in relation to these objects), but a pure subjective<br />

harmony where imagination and understanding are exercised spontaneously, each on its own<br />

account” (KCP 49). In other words, not everybody agrees on what is beautiful, even though,<br />

everybody feels the pleasure associated with the beautiful. This is the difference between<br />

common sense, moral common sense and the aesthetic common sense. “Since it [aesthetic<br />

common sense] does not come into being under a determinate concept, the free play <strong>of</strong><br />

imagination and the understanding cannot be known intellectually but only felt” (KCP 49).<br />

Nobody knows what beauty is, because beauty is not the kind <strong>of</strong> thing that can be known. It is<br />

neither the phenomenon, nor the thing in itself. But everybody feels beauty as pleasure.<br />

We can put the main point <strong>of</strong> Deleuze’s Kant’s Critical Philosophy in following terms.<br />

There is an important difference between the first two Critiques and the third Critique. “The<br />

Critique <strong>of</strong> Judgment does not restrict itself to the perspective <strong>of</strong> conditions as it appeared in the<br />

other two Critiques; with the Critique <strong>of</strong> Judgment, we step into Genesis” (DI 69). For this<br />

reason, Deleuze argues, the Critique <strong>of</strong> Judgment grounds the two other Critiques. “This is<br />

tantamount to saying that the Critique <strong>of</strong> Judgement, in its aesthetic part, does not simply exist to<br />

complete the other two Critiques: in fact, it provides them with a ground” (DI 58). Whatever a<br />

faculty does even if it legislates in another faculty that faculty must first be developed. “How<br />

could any faculty, which is legislative for a particular purpose, induce the other faculties to<br />

perform complementary, indispensible tasks, if all the faculties together were not, to begin with,<br />

165

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!