Make aesthetics Kantian again

Just reposting from The Guardian this time I’m afraid. Much dispute to be made over the issue if at least public buildings are intersubjectively beautiful if classicist but if classicism is at stake, I cannot soberly argue and it will be about my taste, my being Greek etc. Before I plead for an order issued by Trump, I am giving you the article.

Just a moment: before I continue with reposting, I just remembered – and I only want to share this with you – this passage where Gramsci writes about Latin in Italian high schools the point being: We won’t abolish it just because Gentile who wanted Latin was a right-wing Hegelian. But maybe it’s my and his taste again…


Trump issues order to demand new US federal buildings be ‘beautiful’ | Donald Trump | The Guardian

Beauty released

The new BPC volume made my day. As the series editor I would like to congratulate Íngrid and Wolfgang and wish the book an influential function in the related discussions.

(Table of contents after the picture)

Series: Philosophia_Basic Philosophical Concepts 

Wolfgang Huemer and Íngrid Vendrell Ferran (Editors)


New Essays in Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art

Munich 2019. 434 pp. Index, Abstracts, Contributors 

ISBN Paperback: 978-3-88405-124-5

ISBN eɃook 978-3-88405-737-7

Each  98.00    

The notion of beauty has been and continues to be one of the main concerns of aesthetics and art theory. Traditionally, the centrality of beauty in the experience of art was widely accepted and beauty was considered one of the key values in aesthetics. In recent debate, however, the significance of the notion of beauty has been discussed controversially. Especially in the second half of the twentieth century, the role of beauty was strongly challenged both by artists and in philosophy and theory of art. Beauty was no longer a central value, but just one aesthetic feature among many others. In recent years, however, the notion of beauty has been re-evaluated, some even speak of a “comeback of beauty”. Against this background it is one of the main tasks and challenges of contemporary aesthetics to develop a more profound understanding of the nature of beauty, its different forms and dimensions, and its place in art theory and practice – and in human life.

In the contributions to this volume, leading scholars in the field explore the significance of the notion of beauty, its key aspects, and its relevance in various aesthetic disciplines. The questions addressed in the volume can be summarized in the following three headings: What is beauty? What is beautiful? How does the value of beauty relate to other aesthetical values?

Table of Contents

“Introduction”: Wolfgang Huemer and Íngrid Vendrell Ferran, pp. 7 ff.

“Beauty and Aesthetic Properties”: Taking Inspiration from Kant Sonia Sedivy, pp. 25 ff.

“Beauty and Rules: Kant and Wittgenstein on the Cognitive Relevance of Aesthetics”: Hanne Appelqvist, pp. 43 ff.

“Challenging the Notion of Intelligible Beauty”: Elisabeth Schellekens, pp. 71 ff.

“Non-Sensory Beauty and Meaning Qualia”: Maria Elisabeth Reicher, pp. 91 ff.

“Beauty and the Agential Dimension of the Judgment of Taste”: María José Alcaraz León, pp. 123 ff.

“Beauty and Bell’s Aesthetic Emotion”: Catrin Misselhorn, pp. 145 ff.

“Art, Beauty, and Criticism”: Noël Carroll, pp. 171 ff.

“The Value of Art: On Meaning and Aesthetic Experience in Difficult Modern Art”: Richard Eldridge, pp. 185 ff.

“The Beauty of Doing: Remarks on the Appreciation of Conceptual Art”: Davide Dal Sasso, pp. 209 ff.

“The Case Against Beauty”: Otto Neumaier, pp. 243 ff.

“An Aesthetics of Insight”: John Gibson, pp. 277 ff.

“Aesthetic Experience and the Experience of Poetry”: Peter Lamarque, pp. 307 ff.

“The Beauty of Landscape”: Allen Carlson, pp. 331 ff.

“The Virtue Analysis of Inner Beauty: Inner Beauty as Moral, Eudaimonistic, 

or Relational Virtueness”: Lisa Katharin Schmalzried, pp. 353 ff.

“Cosmetics and Makeup”: Stephen Davies, pp. 393 ff.

The Contributors to this Volume, pp. 413 ff.

Abstracts, pp. 419 ff.

Index, pp. 427 ff.

Rebecca Horn

Scroll for English

Wer Texte schreiben will, statt Kunst zu machen (hier am Beispiel von Werken Rebecca Horns, gegenwärtig im Basler Tinguely-Museum zu sehen), sollte Texte schreiben. Die Konzeptkunst ist selbstverleugnend.

Im Gegensatz zur Konzeptkunst steht die kantische Kunst, d.h. dekorative Kunst, die nur wegen unseres Wohlgefallens und keines Interesses am Objekt bewundert wird. Die kantische Kunst widerspricht sich: Niemand bewundert das Unattraktive.

Die Kunst, die die meisten kennen, befindet sich in der Mitte – genau der Stelle also, die Horn nicht kennt.

Enough with scrolling

After a visit of the Rebecca Horn exhibition at the Tinguely Museum in Basel, Switzerland:

Artists who would rather like to write texts, should rather write texts.

In the antipodes of conceptual artists you have the Kantians, i.e. artists who try to depict objects in which the spectator is desinterested albeit aesthetically satisfied. To disable interest in a human body, Kantians would rather depict human bodies that do not appeal to one’s libido. However, this invites a contradiction. Who would be satisfied from something explicitly unattractive?

The art most people know lies in the middle between conceptual and Kantian art. Horn avoids this spot.