Kant’s “Theory of Music”

Oliver Thorndike

Kant’s “Theory of Music”

Oliver Thorndike

Resumen

One thing to expect from a theory of absolute music is that it explains what makes it so significant to us. Kant rightly observes that the essence of absolute music is our affective response to it. Yet none of the standard 18^th century theories, arousal theory and aesthetic rationalism, can explain both the universality of a judgment of taste and its subjective emotional content. The paper argues that Kant’s own aesthetic theory of aesthetic ideas is on the right path for explaining the emotive significance of music, but that Kant does not further pursue this route because his interest in a “theory of music” is only peripheral to his systematic interest as a transcendental philosopher. For both philosophical and historical reasons, Kant does not have a “theory of music.” Nevertheless, if we free Kant’s conception of aesthetic idea and its restriction to Geist from the background of its 18th century humanism, then Kant’s aesthetics of free play becomes a good theory to account for the broad variety of emotions in absolute music as a fine art proper.

Palabras clave

Kant; Hume; Hutcheson; absolute music; paradox of subjective universality; arousal theory; aesthetic rationalism; aesthetic ideas

Texto completo:

PDF HTML

Referencias

Allison, H. (2001), Kant’s Theory of Taste, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Beiser, F. (2010), Diotima’s Children: German aesthetic rationalism from Leibniz to Lessing, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Eldridge, R. (2014), An Introduction to the Philosophy of Art, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Gracyk, T. (2020), “Hume’s Aesthetics”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2020 Edition), ed. E. Zalta , URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/hume-aesthetics/

Guyer, P. (2014), A History of Modern Aesthetics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Kant, I. (2000), Critique of the Power of Judgment, ed. P. Guyer, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Henrich, D. (1957/58), “Hutcheson und Kant”, Kant-Studien 49 (1-4), pp. 49-69.

Hume, D. (2008), “Of the Standard of Taste,” in Aesthetics: A comprehensive Anthology, ed. S. Kahn and A. Meskin, Blackwell Publishing, Malden, pp. 103-112.

Hutcheson, F. (2008), An Inquiry into the Original of Our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, revised edition, ed. W. Leidhold, Liberty Fund, Indianapolis.

Kivy, P. (1993), “Kant and the Affektenlehre,” in The fine art of repetition: Essays in the philosophy of music, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 250-264.

Kulenkampff, J. (1990), “The Objectivity of Taste: Hume and Kant,” Noûs 24, pp. 93–100.

Kulenkampff, J. (1987), “Musik bei Kant und Hegel,” Hegel-Studien 22, pp. 143-163.

Le Huray, P. and Day, J. (1981), Music and Aesthetics in the Eighteenth and Early-Nineteenth Centuries, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Matherne, S. (2014), “Kant’s Expressive Theory of Music”, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 72 (2), pp. 129-145.

Mohr, G. (2010), “Kant on Music as Beautiful Art”, Mary Gregor Lecture, Chicago, February 19, 2010, URL = KantOnMusic20100502Web.doc

Monk, R. (1990), Ludwig Wittgenstein: The duty of genius, Penguin Books, New York.

Ravasio, M., “History of Western Philosophy of Music: Antiquity to 1800”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition), ed. E. Zalta, URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/hist-westphilmusic-to-1800/

Thorndike, O. (2018), Kant’s Transition Project and Late Philosophy: Connecting the Opus postumum and Metaphysics of Morals, Bloomsbury, London.

Vorländer, K. (2004), Immanuel Kant: Der Mann und das Werk, Marix Verlag, Wiesbaden.

Wittgenstein, L. (1984), Culture and Value, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Young, J. (2020), “Kant’s Musical Antiformalism”, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 78 (2), pp. 171-181.

DOI (HTML): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5776100