This post aims to explore Immanuel Kant's theory of beauty, delving into his ideas on aesthetic judgment, disinterestedness, and the sublime. From a link with the blackpill, we will critically analyze Kant's contributions to aesthetics and their implications. By examining his concepts in a sincere manner, we aim to gain a deeper understanding of Kant's thoughts on beauty and their significance in the field of philosophy, beyond the war worn out terminology and spent etymology. Formal logic will also be used to reinforce or refute arguments and definitions.
1: Beauty and aesthetic judgment: the subjective-universal nexus.
1.1 The concept of subjective judgment according to Kant.
Immanuel Kant's exploration of beauty acknowledges the inherent subjectivity of individual experiences and personal tastes in aesthetic judgment. According to Kant, beauty is not an objective quality inherent in objects themselves but rather a product of our subjective perception and the cognitive faculties we bring to bear on our experience.
Kant argues that when we encounter an object of beauty, we engage in a subjective judgment based on our individual preferences, sensibilities, and cultural background. The qualities we find pleasing or captivating may differ from person to person, as our aesthetic tastes are shaped by our unique histories and perspectives.
In this context, subjective judgment does not imply a relativistic view where anything can be considered beautiful. Kant emphasizes that while judgments of beauty are subjective, they are not purely arbitrary or random. Instead, they are guided by principles rooted in our shared human nature and common understanding of aesthetic experiences.
Kant proposes that aesthetic judgments involve a reflective and deliberate assessment of an object's form, harmony, and proportion. These judgments arise from the interaction between our sensory perception and our cognitive faculties, such as imagination and understanding. While subjectivity is a fundamental aspect of aesthetic judgment, it is not divorced from reason and critical reflection.
Moreover, Kant acknowledges the influence of cultural and historical factors on aesthetic judgment. Different cultures and periods may have distinct aesthetic norms and preferences, shaping the way individuals perceive and evaluate beauty. However, Kant maintains that there are certain universal principles and standards that transcend cultural boundaries, allowing for shared judgments of beauty.
By acknowledging the role of subjectivity in aesthetic judgment, Kant provides a framework that recognizes and respects individual differences in taste and preference. He does not seek to impose a rigid and dogmatic notion of beauty but rather acknowledges the richness and diversity of human aesthetic experiences, because ultimately, there is no beauty without sensory perception and its measurement depends on the inherent intersubjectivity.
1.2 The inability to consider beauty as objective but intersubjective.
Based on this, any consideration of understanding beauty as an objective fact is etymologically false because there is no quality of beauty without sensory perception:
Outside of sensory perception, there is no beauty and no measurement of beauty. Therefore, beauty is not objective and it is not measurable.
2: The logical and formal proof:
2. 1. Beauty is not objective and measurable outside the brain:
Premise 1: ~(O(B) ∧ M(B))
2. 2. Nothing has an objective nature if it depends on sensory perception:
Premise 2: ~(∃x)(S(x) ∧ O(x))
2. 3. Assuming the above premises, beauty cannot be objective or measurable —except in the neural response to neurally pleasing stimuli—.
Premise 3: ~(O(B) ∧ M(B))
Concluding the second premise: nothing has an objective nature if it depends on sensory perception.
1: Beauty and aesthetic judgment: the subjective-universal nexus.
1.1 The concept of subjective judgment according to Kant.
Immanuel Kant's exploration of beauty acknowledges the inherent subjectivity of individual experiences and personal tastes in aesthetic judgment. According to Kant, beauty is not an objective quality inherent in objects themselves but rather a product of our subjective perception and the cognitive faculties we bring to bear on our experience.
Kant argues that when we encounter an object of beauty, we engage in a subjective judgment based on our individual preferences, sensibilities, and cultural background. The qualities we find pleasing or captivating may differ from person to person, as our aesthetic tastes are shaped by our unique histories and perspectives.
In this context, subjective judgment does not imply a relativistic view where anything can be considered beautiful. Kant emphasizes that while judgments of beauty are subjective, they are not purely arbitrary or random. Instead, they are guided by principles rooted in our shared human nature and common understanding of aesthetic experiences.
Kant proposes that aesthetic judgments involve a reflective and deliberate assessment of an object's form, harmony, and proportion. These judgments arise from the interaction between our sensory perception and our cognitive faculties, such as imagination and understanding. While subjectivity is a fundamental aspect of aesthetic judgment, it is not divorced from reason and critical reflection.
Moreover, Kant acknowledges the influence of cultural and historical factors on aesthetic judgment. Different cultures and periods may have distinct aesthetic norms and preferences, shaping the way individuals perceive and evaluate beauty. However, Kant maintains that there are certain universal principles and standards that transcend cultural boundaries, allowing for shared judgments of beauty.
By acknowledging the role of subjectivity in aesthetic judgment, Kant provides a framework that recognizes and respects individual differences in taste and preference. He does not seek to impose a rigid and dogmatic notion of beauty but rather acknowledges the richness and diversity of human aesthetic experiences, because ultimately, there is no beauty without sensory perception and its measurement depends on the inherent intersubjectivity.
1.2 The inability to consider beauty as objective but intersubjective.
Based on this, any consideration of understanding beauty as an objective fact is etymologically false because there is no quality of beauty without sensory perception:
Thus, the scientific blackpill contradicts itself by speaking of an objective beauty —that is, by the very nature of beauty of the object—, and linking it to the perception of the brain is to define beauty as an intersubjective value encoded in our neural nature, but it does not respond in itself to the fact that things are beautiful because of their objective nature. That is, beauty cannot be defined as objective because it cannot exist without sensory perception and there is no measurable beauty other than a measurement of what our neural code understands as appetizing.
Outside of sensory perception, there is no beauty and no measurement of beauty. Therefore, beauty is not objective and it is not measurable.
2: The logical and formal proof:
2. 1. Beauty is not objective and measurable outside the brain:
Premise 1: ~(O(B) ∧ M(B))
2. 2. Nothing has an objective nature if it depends on sensory perception:
Premise 2: ~(∃x)(S(x) ∧ O(x))
2. 3. Assuming the above premises, beauty cannot be objective or measurable —except in the neural response to neurally pleasing stimuli—.
Premise 3: ~(O(B) ∧ M(B))
Concluding the second premise: nothing has an objective nature if it depends on sensory perception.
Last edited:
