Mar 8, 2011

Elegi Menggapai "KANT’S AESTHETICS JUDGMENT"



By Marsigit


In the Critique of Judgment , Kant, 1790, outlined the Critique of Aesthetic Judgment consists of Analytic of Aesthetic Judgment and Dialectic of Aesthetic Judgment in which to be elaborated also the Analytic of Beautiful includes the kinds of the judgment of taste; and Analytic of Sublime includes the mathematically the sublime and the dynamically sublime in the nature.



It was stated in Burnham, 2003, that the predicate “aesthetic” can qualify many different kinds of things: judgments, experiences, concepts, properties, or words.

We can understand other aesthetic kinds of things in terms of aesthetic judgments: aesthetic properties are those that are ascribed in aesthetic judgments; aesthetic experiences are those that ground aesthetic judgments; aesthetic concepts are those that are deployed in aesthetic judgments; and aesthetic words are those that are typically used in the linguistic expression of aesthetic judgments.

The document noted that the basic explicit purpose of Kant's Critique of Judgment is to investigate whether the faculty of judgment provides itself with an a priori principle.

Kant assumed that judgment was simply a name for the combined operation of other mental faculties and speculated that the operation of judgment might be organized and directed by a fundamental a priori principle that is unique to it.

Kant insisted that the faculty of understanding is that which supplies concepts that is universals, and reason is that which draws inferences e.g. constructs syllogisms, and judgment 'mediates' between the understanding and reason by allowing individual acts of sub-sumption to occur; he then distinguished between determinate and reflective judgments.

Aesthetic judgments, according to Kant, to be a particularly interesting form of reflective judgments.


The Judgment of the Beautiful


Burnham, 2003, noted Kant that an aesthetic judgments or judgments of taste must have four key distinguishing features: disinterested, universal, necessary and final without end.

It is disinterested because it is pleasurable judgment; it is universal and necessity because it is in fact a product of features of the human mind; and it is purposive without purpose or final without end because it is the concept according to which it was made that an object is purposive if it appears to have such a purpose, or in other word they should affect us as if they had a purpose, although no particular purpose can be found.

Having identified the major features of aesthetic judgments, Kant then delivered the questions how such judgments are possible, and are such
judgments in any way valid that is, are they really universal and necessary.

Kant initially focused on judgments about beauty in nature to answer what does such a judgment mean, and how does it take place as a mental act; he then needs to clarify the basic features of such judgments and concluded that on aesthetic judgments there must have a number of peculiar features which at first sight look like nothing other than paradoxes that he called 'moments'; the first moment is “disinterested”, the second moment is “universal”, the third moment is “purposiveness” , and the fourth moment is “necessary”.

Kant outlined that there are two types of interest that are by way of sensations in the agreeable, and by way of concepts in the good; only aesthetic judgment is free or pure of any such interests.

He defined interest as a link to real desire and action, and thus also to a determining connection to the real existence of the object.

According to Kant, in the aesthetic judgment, the real existence of the beautiful object is quite irrelevant and that aesthetic judgments are disinterested .

He claimed that judgment results in pleasure, rather than pleasure resulting in judgment; and the aesthetic judgment must concern itself only with form in the object presented, not sensible content.

Burnham, 2003, elaborated. Kant’s claims that aesthetic judgments behave universally; if we judge a certain landscape to be beautiful, we at least implicitly demand universality in the name of taste.

Kant argues that there is always a tendency to see 'beauty' as if it were somehow in the object or the immediate experience of the object and that such a relativist view can not account for the social behavior of our claims about what we find beautiful.

Meanwhile, Kant claimed that an object's purpose is the concept according to which it was manufactured; therefore, purposiveness is the property of at least appearing to have been manufactured or designed.

Kant concluded that the beautiful has to be understood as purposive, but without any definite purpose because a definite purpose would be either the set of external purposes or the internal purpose.

Accordingly, beauty is equivalent neither to utility nor perfection, but is still purposive; in nature, it will appear as purposive with respect to our faculty of judgment, but its beauty will have no ascertainable purpose that is, it is not purposive with respect to determinate cognition.

Burnham, 2003, also elaborated Kant’s claims that aesthetic judgments must pass the test of being necessary that the judgment does not either follow or produce a determining concept of beauty, but exhausts itself in being exemplary precisely of an aesthetic judgment.


The Deduction of Taste


Burnham, 2003, noted Kant that our faculty or ability to judge consisted of being a mere processor of other, much more fundamental mental presentations that are concepts and intuitions; everything interesting and fundamental happened in the formation of concepts, or in the receiving of intuitions.

However, Kant argued that judgment has a fundamental principle that governs it that asserts the purposiveness of all phenomena with respect to our judgment or everything we experience can be tackled by our powers of judgment.

Kant claimed that in the case of the beautiful we do notice that this assumption is being made because the beautiful not only draws particular attention to its purposiveness but also has no concept of a purpose available, so that we cannot just apply a concept and be
done with it; the beautiful forces us to grope for concepts that we can never find and it is not an alien and disturbing experience, on the contrary, it is pleasurable; the principle of purposiveness is satisfied, but in a new and unique way.

According to Kant, as noted by Burnham, 2003, that the kinds of cognition characteristic of the contemplation of the beautiful are not all that different from ordinary cognition about things in the world; the faculties of the mind are 'understanding' which is responsible for concepts, and 'sensibility' which is responsible for intuitions.

Kant argued in aesthetic cognition there is no one determinate concept that pins down an intuition; intuition is allowed some free play and acts in harmony with the lawfulness in general of the understanding as common sense; hence the common sense was plausible as a possible explanation of the tendency to universality observed in aesthetic judgments.

Throughout the Four Moments of the Beautiful, Kant elaborated many important clues as to the transcendental account of the possibility of aesthetic judgment e.g. communicability, common sense and the harmony of the cognitive sub-faculties.

By deduction Kant explicitly attempted to demonstrate the universal communicability and thus inter-subjective validity of judgments of taste that there is a 'common sense' that humans all must have a kind of sensing ability which operates the same way.


The Sublime


For Kant, as it elaborated by Burnham, 2003, the other basic type of aesthetic experience is the sublime that is idea of absolute totality or absolute freedom, and thus the sublime is a kind of rapid alternation between the fear of the overwhelming and the peculiar pleasure of seeing that overwhelming overwhelmed.

According to Kant, the connection between the sublime and morality can be raised up that the whole sublime experience would not be possible if humans had not received a moral training that taught them to recognize the importance of their own faculty of reason.

Kant noted that while the beautiful is concerned with form, the sublime may even be formless and while the beautiful indicates a purposiveness of nature that may have profound implications, the sublime appears to be counter-purposive, as well as although from the above one might expect the sublime experience to be painful in some way, in fact the sublime does still involve pleasure.

Kant, as it elaborated by Burnham, 2003, divides the sublime into the 'mathematical' that is concerned with things that have a great magnitude in and of themselves and the 'dynamically' that is things that have a magnitude of force in relation to us, particularly our will.

He defined mathematical sublime as something absolutely large that is large beyond all comparison; objects of sense are called 'sublime' only by a kind of covert sleight-of-hand.

According to Kant, the sublime experience has two-layer process that are a contra-purposive layer in which our faculties of sense fail to complete their task of presentation, and a strangely purposive layer in which this very failure constitutes a 'negative exhibition' of the ideas of reason which could not otherwise be presented.

Kant insisted that in the dynamically sublime a 'might' or power is observed in nature that is irresistible with respect to our bodily or sensible selves; in particular, nature is called 'sublime merely because it elevates the imagination to the exhibition of those cases wherein the mind can be made to feel the sublimity that is proper to its vocation.

Kant suggested, as noted by Burnham,2003, that the sublimity belongs to human freedom which is unassailable to the forces of nature; such a conception of freedom as being outside the order of nature, but demanding action upon that order.

Fine Art and Genius

Kant, as noted by Burnham, 2003, argued that art can be tasteful and yet be soulless that certain something would make it more than just an artificial version of a beautiful natural object and what provides soul in fine art is an aesthetic idea that is a counterpart to a rational idea that is a concept that could never adequately be exhibited sensibly.

According to Kant, an aesthetic idea is as successful an attempt as possible to 'exhibit' the rational idea that is the talent of genius to generate aesthetic ideas, but that is not all; the mode of expression must be tasteful because the understanding's 'lawfulness' is the condition of the expression being in any sense universal and capable of being shared and the genius must find a mode of expression which allows a viewer not just to 'understand' the work conceptually but also to reach something like the same excited yet harmonious state of mind that the genius had in creating.

Kant begins by giving a long clarification of art.

As a general term, again, art refers to the activity of making according to a preceding notion.

If I make a chair, I must know, in advance, what a chair is.

We distinguish art from nature because (though we may judge nature purposive) we know in fact there is no prior notion behind the activity of a flower opening.

The flower doesn't have an idea of opening prior to opening - the flower doesn't have a mind or a will to have or execute ideas with.

Kant subdivided arts into mechanical and aesthetic; the former are those which never-the-less are controlled by some definite concept of a purpose to be produced and the latter are those wherein the immediate object is merely pleasure itself; and therefore, Kant distinguished between agreeable and fine art, the former produces pleasure through sensation alone and the latter through various types of cognitions.

Accordingly, fine art is a type of purposeful production and its production according to a concept of an object but it has no concept adequate to its production; else any judgment on it will fail one of the key features of all aesthetic judgments: namely purposiveness without a purpose and fine art therefore must both be, and not be, an art in general (Burnham, 2003).

Kant, as noted by Burnham, 2003, defined genius as the talent that gives the rule to art that is the innate mental predisposition through which nature gives the rule to art; therefore, talent is an innate productive ability of the artist and as such belongs itself to nature.

Kant noted that fine art is produced by individual humans, but not as contingent individuals that is not by human nature in the empirically known sense; and fine art as aesthetic can have no definite rules or concepts for producing or judging it as well as that the rule supplied by genius is more a rule governing what to produce, rather than how.

Kant then concluded that while all fine art is a beautiful 'presentation' of an object, this partly obscures the fact that genius is involved in the original creation of the object to be presented; genius provides the matter for fine art while taste provides the form and the beautiful is always formal.

He insisted that the aesthetic idea is a presentation of the imagination to which no thought is adequate and this is a 'counterpart' to rational ideas which are thoughts to which nothing sensible or imagined can be adequate.

Kant concluded that the cognition involved in judging fine art is similar to the cognition involved in judging natural beauty.

References:
1.Theodore Gracyk, © 2002, 2004 PHILOSOPHY OF ART, HUME AND KANT: Summary and Comparison, http://www.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/phil of art/ hume_and_kant.htm#6, elaborated that although some passages in the Critique of Judgment sound like a response to Hume, this is due to their common influences within the British tradition that regards the apprehension of beauty as an exercise of taste. With the Critique of Judgment, Kant's mature theory reveals a rethinking of art and taste as aspects of larger issues. Unfortunately, Kant then deals with them in relation to a complex, jargon-filled philosophical system. Burnham, 2003, Aesthetic Judgment of Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=aesthetic-judgment, noted that Kant's Critique of Judgment (the third Critique) was and continues to be a surprise - even to Kant, for it emerged out of Kant's philosophical activity having not been a part of the original plan. Thus, the central problem of the Critique of Judgment is a broad one: the unity of philosophy in general; his problem is investigated by that mental faculty which Kant believes is the key to this unity, namely judgment; nd judgment is investigated by the critical inquiry into those types of judgment in which the a priori principle of judgment is apparent: on the beautiful, on the sublime, and on teleology
2.Andrew Chignell, 2004, Aesthetics and Philosophy of the Arts: The Problem of Particularity in Kant’s Aesthetic Theory, andrew.chignell@yale.edu, indicated that an aesthetic judgment is unique in kind and provides absolutely no cognition (not even a confused one) of the object; only a logical judgment does that. An aesthetic judgment instead refers the presentation, by which an object is given, solely to the subject; it brings to our notice no characteristic of the object, but only the purposive form in the [way] the presentational powers are determined in their engagement with the object. Indeed, the judgment is called aesthetic precisely because the basis determining it is not a concept but the feeling (of the inner sense) of that accordance in the play of the mental powers insofar as it can only be sensed.
3.Theodore Gracyk, © 2002, 2004 PHILOSOPHY OF ART, HUME AND KANT: Summary and Comparison, http://www.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/phil of art/ hume_and_kant.htm#6, noted from Kant that human cognition also requires reflective judgment, in which our thinking is not determined by concepts already known. Kant proposes that taste comes into play in such situations, as a form of reflective judgment. In pure judgments of taste, Kant holds that the reflective judgment involves no recognition of the object as subsumed under a concept.
4.Andrew Chignell, 2004, Aesthetics and Philosophy of the Arts:The Problem of Particularity in Kant’s Aesthetic Theory, Yale University, andrew.chignell@yale.edu indicated that for Kant, the form of the aesthetic experience—the way our faculties interact upon being presented with beautiful objects—is the sine qua non of a well-formed judgment of taste; Savile violates the spirit of Kant’s theory when he has us attributing beauty to art objects because their conceptual content strikes us as expressive of rational ideas, and therefore as morally valuable. Of course, it is possible in principle for the imagination to call to mind associations of this sort for any presentation of sense; however, Kant seems to think that such an attempt with respect to a non-beautiful presentation will not produce pleasure. The non-beautiful object "leaves nothing behind as an [I]dea and makes the spirit dull, the object gradually disgusting, and the mind dissatisfied with itself and moody because it is conscious that in reason’s judgment its attunement is contrapurposive." Only an object that is connected "closely or remotely with moral ideas" will prove rich enough upon contemplation to avoid this "ultimate fate."
5.It was elaborated in Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Copyright © 1994-2000, that Kant’s work of the Critique of Judgment falls into two main parts, called respectively "Critique of Aesthetic Judgment" and "Critique of Teleological Judgment." In the first of these, after an introduction in which he discussed "logical purposiveness," he analyzed the notion of "aesthetic purposiveness" in judgments that ascribe beauty to something. Such a judgment, according to him, unlike a mere expression of taste, lays claim to general validity; yet it cannot be said to be cognitive because it rests on feeling, not on argument.
6.Nick Zangwill , 2003, Aesthetic Judgment Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy, nick.zangwill@st-catherines.oxford.ac.uk explained that, unlike other sorts of intentional pleasures, pleasure in beauty is “disinterested”. This means, very roughly, that it is a pleasure which does not involve desire -- pleasure in beauty is desire-free. That is, the pleasure is neither based on desire nor does it produce one by itself. In this respect, pleasure in beauty is unlike pleasure in the agreeable, unlike pleasure in what is good for me, and unlike pleasure in what is morally good. According to Kant, all such pleasures are “interested” -- they are bound up with desire.
7.Theodore Gracyk, © 2002, 2004 PHILOSOPHY OF ART, HUME AND KANT: Summary and Comparison, http://www.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/phil of art/ hume_and_kant.htm#6, noted that Hume and Kant try to escape this difficulty by denying that taste is a single, distinct faculty; they treat it as a complex response that involves sense perception, imagination, and judgment. Both writers ultimately use taste and art as a basis for investigating a much broader range of issues concerning human intersubjectivity.
8.Burnham, 2003, Aesthetic Judgment of Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato. stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=aesthetic-judgment, noted that throughout the Four Moments of the Beautiful, Kant has dropped many important clues as to the transcendental account of the possibility of aesthetic judgment: in particular, we have talked about communicability, common sense and the harmony of the cognitive sub-faculties. Kant then cuts off to turn to the sublime, representing a different problem within aesthetic judgment. He returns to beauty in sect.30, which forms the transition to the passages tantalizingly called the Deduction. These transitional passages feel much like a continuation of the Four Moments; we will treat them as such here, since also Kant claims that the sublime does not need a Deduction. The Deduction in fact appears in two versions in Kant's texts (sect.9 and 21 being the first; sect.30-40 the second, with further important clarification in the 'Dialectic' sect.55-58).
9.Ibid. Noted from Kant that of common sense, we explicitly are attempting to demonstrate the universal communicability and thus intersubjective validity of judgments of taste.
10.Burnham, 2003, Aesthetic Judgment of Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato. stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=aesthetic-judgment, noted that Traditionally, the sublime has been the name for objects inspiring awe, because of the magnitude of their size/height/depth (e.g. the ocean, the pyramids of Cheops), force (a storm), or transcendence (our idea of God). Vis-à-vis the beautiful, the sublime presents some unique puzzles to Kant. Three in particular are of note. First, that while the beautiful is concerned with form, the sublime may even be (or even especially be) formless. Second, that while the beautiful indicates (at least for judgment) a purposiveness of nature that may have profound implications, the sublime appears to be 'counter-purposive'. That is, the object appears ill-matched to, does 'violence' to, our faculties of sense and cognition. Robert Raikes Clewis, 2003, Aesthetic and moral judgment: The Kantian sublime in the "Observations", the "Remarks" (translated), and the "Critique of Judgment" (Immanuel Kant), Boston College, elaborated that in the earlier accounts (Part I), the four types of the sublime (das Erhabene )-the splendid, the noble, the terrifying, and the grotesque-share a bipolar structure of positive uplift and negative descent ; moral judgment is not clearly distinguished from aesthetic judgment. In the Observations, moral feeling is defined in terms of sublimity, and in both accounts moral judgment is involved in distinguishing apparent from genuine sublimity. However, four types of sublimity in the Critique of Judgment Part II, are characterized: the mathematical, the dynamical, the moral, and the sublime of mental states.
11.Theodore Gracyk, © 2002, 2004 PHILOSOPHY OF ART, HUME AND KANT: Summary and Comparison, http://www.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/phil of art/ hume_and_kant.htm#6, elaborated that although Kant's account of genius points towards nineteenth century Romanticism, sections 48 and 50 emphasize that genius produces great art only when reigned in by taste. Without an element of "academic correctness" constraining the artwork's form, genius risks nonsense. Yet rather than communicate according to established conventions, genius involves originality in which "nature gives the rule to art."

23 comments:

  1. Sehar Trihatun
    16709251043
    S2 Pend. Mat Kelas C – 2016

    Aesthetics judgment menurut Kant merupakan bentuk dari putusan reflektif. Salah satu bentuk dari aesthetics judgment menurut Kant meliputi keputusan mengenai keindahan. Putusan-putusan kita mengenai keindahan ini berbentuk 4 macam, yaitu disinterested, universal, necessary dan final without end.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Resvita Febrima
    16709251076
    P-Mat D 2016

    Kant mencatat bahwa seni rupa diproduksi oleh manusia perorangan, namun bukan sebagai individu kontingen yang bukan oleh kodrat manusia secara empirik berarti hal ini menggunakan pengalaman.
    Dan seni rupa sebagai estetika tidak dapat memiliki peraturan atau konsep yang pasti untuk memproduksi atau menghakimi dan juga bahwa peraturan yang diberikan oleh jenius lebih merupakan peraturan yang mengatur apa yang akan dihasilkan, dan bukan bagaimana caranya.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ARNY HADA INDA
    16709251079
    PPS-MAT D 2016 (S2)
    Pertama kali dirumuskan secara rinci oleh Kant pada abad ke-18, estetika penilaian adalah berbasis perasaan penghakiman di mana objek ditemukan indah, dan bahwa kita berhak untuk membuat penilaian semacam itu meskipun mampu untuk memverifikasi itu. Di keyakinannya bahwa penilaian ini pada dasarnya subjektif (yang berasal dari atau didasarkan pada subyek perasaan), Kant sesuai dengan tradisi sebelumnya. Dalam pembangunan gagasan penghakiman estetika, namun, subyektivitas berbasis perasaan ini telah menjadi kurang penting daripada deskripsi Kant bagaimana seorang hakim estetika menghadiri ke objek penghakiman-Nya.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Muh Ferry Irwansyah
    15709251062
    Pendidikan Matematika PPS UNY
    Kelas D
    Menurut Immanuel Kant menjelaskan mengenai pengalaman. Pengalaman yang dimaksud ialah pengalaman yang didapat siswa dalam kegiatan pembelajaran untuk digunakan dalam menyelesaikan atau memecahkan soal. Pengalaman tersebut dibedakan menjadi 4, yaitu pengalaman adalah kognisi empiris, pengalaman karena rasa takut, pengalaman kognisi objek, dan penetuan keberadaan objek. Dengan adanya pengalaman akan membantu siswa dalam memunculkan intuisi dalam dirinya.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Primaningtyas Nur Arifah
    16709251042
    Pend. Matematika S2 kelas C 2016
    Assalamu’alaikum. Kant menganggap bahwa penilaian hanyalah sebuah nama untuk gabungan kemampuan fakultas mental lainnya dan berspekulasi bahwa operasi penghakiman dapat diatur dan diarahkan oleh prinsip a priori fundamental yang unik. Kant berkeras bahwa pemahamanlah yang memasok konsep yang bersifat universal. Kant kemudian membedakan antara penilaian yang menentukan dan reflektif.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sylviyani Hardiarti
    16709251069
    S2 Pendidikan Matematika Kelas D 2016

    Aesthetics judgment menurut Kant merupakan bentuk dari penilaian reflektif yang sangat menarik. Aesthetics judgement dapat berupa the judgement of the beautiful, the deduction of taste, and fine art and genius. Penilaian tentang keindahan, rasa, dan seni dari suatu objek serta tingkat kecerdasan seseorang adalah sesuatu yang reflektif dan relatif. Menurut si A, suatu lukisan sangat indah, tapi bisa saja menurut si B, lukisan tersebut biasa-biasa saja. Tingkat keindahan, rasa, seni dan kecerdasan tidak bisa didefinisikan dengan jelas. Aesthetic judgement ini bisa dihasilkan melalui intuisi. Hal ini karena tidak segala sesuatu bisa didefinisikan, misalnya indah, cantik, enak, baik, cerdas, dll. Itu semua intuisi.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lihar Raudina Izzati
    16709251046
    P. Mat C 2016 PPs UNY

    Kant meninjau keindahan dari 2 segi, pertama dari segi subyektif dan obyektif. Keindahan dari segi subyektif adalah sesuatu yang tanpa direnungkan dan tanpa ada sangkut pautnya dengan kegunaan praktis, tetapi mendatangkan rasa senang pada si penghayat. Keindahan dari segi obyektif adalah keserasian dari suatu obyek terhadap tujuan yang dikandungnya, sejauh obyek ini tidak ditinjau dari segi gunanya. Bagi Kant , sarana kejiwaan yang disebut cita rasa itu berhubungan dengan dicapainya kepuasan atau tidak dicapainya kepuasaan atas obyek yang diamati. Rasa puas itu pun berkaitan dengan minat seseorang atas sesuatu. Suatu obyek dikatakan indah apabila memuaskan minat seseorang dan sekaligus menarik minatnya.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Loviga Denny Pratama
    16709251075
    S2 P.Mat D

    Dalam artikel ini saya mendapatkan pemahaman bahwa Critique of Judgment Estetis terdiri dari Estetika analitis dan Dialektika. Kita dapat memahami jenis estetika dengan pertimbangan estetika: sifat estetika adalah mereka yang datang dalam pertimbangan estetika, pengalaman estetika adalah mereka yang menilai estetika, konsep estetika adalah mereka yang dikerahkan dalam pertimbangan estetika, dan estetika adalah kata-kata yang mereka biasanya digunakan dalam ekspresi linguistik penimbangan estetik.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Rahayu Pratiwi
    16709251077
    PPS PM-D 2016

    Kant (Burham, 2003) berpendapat bahwa seni dapat berselera tinggi namun tetap berjiwa, sesuatu yang pasti akan membuatnya lebih dari sekadar versi buatan dari objek alam yang indah dan yang memberi jiwa dalam seni rupa adalah sebuah gagasan estetika.
    Jadi sebenar – benarnya seni dengan kualitas terbaik adalah sebuah gagasan estetika yang memiliki makna sebuah keindahan.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sumandri
    16709251072
    S2 Pendidikan Matematika 2016

    Kant mengemukakan beberapa pokok persoalan, yang secara umum mengemukakan dua aspek penting : pertama, tentang analisis daya penilaian estetis dan dialektika daya penilaian, kedua daya penilaian teleologis atau penyelidikan objecktive purposiveness di dalam alam. Analisis putusan terdiri dari dua hal berikut. yakni tentang analisis tentang "antik (beautiful ) dan analisistentang agung(sublime). Hal pertama dipaparkan dalam empat pertimbangan sebagai berikut. Pertama, penilaian terhadap selera perasaan dari segi kualitas. Setelah menganalisis dengan teliti perasaan puas yang menjadi ciri putusan yang diberikanoleh selera, yaitu suatu perasaan yang tidak bertujuan apa pun. Kant membandingkan antara bentuk-bentuk pemuasan ini, yaitu pemuasan estetis terhadap selera, kelezatan dan kebaikan. Setelah membandingkan bentuk-bentuk ini, ia menyimpulkan kecantikan berdasarkan pertimbangan pertama. bahwa selera adalah kemampuan untuk memberikan putusan senang atau tidak senang.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Luki Slamet Purwoko
    14301241008
    S1 Pendidikan Matematika I 2014

    Immanuel Kant menuturkan bahwa aesthetics judgement atau penilain estetik harus memiliki empat indikator yaitu: disinterested atau tidak memihak, universal, necessary atau kebutuhan dan final without end atau purposive without purpose. (Burham, 2003)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Kunny Kunhertanti
    16709251060
    PPs Pendidikan Matematika kelas C 2016

    Ide Kant dalam penilaian estetika adalah dengan tidak membagikan penilai kita terhadap sesuatu hal pada orang lain. Hal ini sering kita lakukan, dan sering mengakibatkan penilaian cenderung tidak obyektif, akan tetapi menjadi subyektif pada satu orang saja. Tiap orang pasti akan memandang suatu hal dengan sangat berbeda.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lana Sugiarti
    16709251062
    PPs Pendidikan Matematika D 2016

    Dalam bagian terakhir dijelaskan bahwa Kant menyimpulkan bahwa kognisi yang terlibat dalam menilai seni rupa serupa dengan kognisi yang terlibat dalam menilai keindahan alam. Dari hal ini dapat dipelajari bahwa obyek dan materi terlibat dalam penilaian tersebut. Kant kemudian menyimpulkan bahwa sementara semua seni rupa adalah presentasi sebuah objek yang indah, ini mengaburkan kenyataan bahwa jenius terlibat dalam penciptaan asli objek yang akan dipresentasikan. Dari hal ini dapat dipelajari bahwa ilmu yang diperoleh setiap orang berbeda – beda dan kapasitas tiap orang dalam mempelajari ilmu juga berbeda – beda.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Jeanete Nenabu
    PPS PMat D (15709251004)

    Estetika merupakan cabang ilmu filsafat yang membahas tentang keindahan, bagaimana keindahan terbentuk dan cara merasakannya. Menurut Kant, estetika itu dimulai dari seni, yang mengacu pad kegiatan membentuk atau menjadikan ide dalam bentuk yang ada. seni didasarkan pada ide, berarti seni memiliki konsep ideal. Kant mengasumsikan bahwa penilaian adalah operasi kombinasi dari kemampuan mental dan beranggapan bahwa operasi penilaian dapat diorganisasikan dan diarahkan oleh suatu prinsip apriori yang unik. Kant menegaskan bahwa peahaman memasok konsep secara universal dan alasannya adalah untuk penarikan kesimpulan. Dia kemudian membedakan antara determinasi dan penilaian refleksi. Menurutnya, bagian yang menarik dari penilain reflektif adalah penilaian estetika.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jeanete Nenabu
    PPS PMat D (15709251004)

    Menurut elegi ini, Kant membagi penilaian aestetika sebagai Analityc of asthetic judgement dan dialectic of aesthetic judgement. Ditulis bahwa menurut Kant, aesthetic judgement harus memiliki 4 kunci yang membedakan: ketertarikan, universal, keperluan dan akhir tanpa akhir. Ketertarikan karena ini merupakan penilaian yang menyenangkan; universal dan kebutuhan/keperluan karena ini sebenarnya adalah produk dari pikiran manusia; dan ini akhir tanpa akhir karena konsep dasar pembuatan bahwa suatu objek muncul dengan tuuan semacam itu, atau dengan kata lain mereka harus mempengaruhi kita seolah mereka memiliki tujuan meskipun tidak ada tujuan tertentu yang dapat ditemukan

    ReplyDelete
  16. PUTRI RAHAYU S
    S2 PENDIDIKAN MATEMATIKA_D 2016
    16709251070

    Kant membahas tentang penilaian estetika dengan menggunakan istilah ‘momen’. Momen pertama secara kualitas, pertimbangan selera adalah hal yang estetis sebab selera terkait dengan keindahan. Momen kedua secara kuantitas, Kant melangkah kepada gagasan kedua bahwa pertimbangan estetika berlaku secara universal. Momen ketiga, menurut hubungan dengan tujuan yang dibawa, yaitu tentang persoalan tujuan (purpose) dan ketertujuan (purposiveness). Momen keempat, menurut modalitas kepuasan di dalam objek, Kant harus memenuhi syarat perlu (necessity).

    ReplyDelete
  17. SUMIATI
    16709251056_PMC 2016
    Pendidikan Matematika-S2

    Bismillaah...
    Penilaian estetika menurut Kant memuat 4 Aspek, yaitu: 1) Kualitas : tanpa pamrih (hanya keindahan yang bisa memberi rasa senang tanpa pamrih). Tidak tergantung moralitas, manfaat, dan kepuasan inderawi. Terlepas dari keuntungan kepentingan apapun; 2) Kuantitas : universal (semua orang setuju hal itu indah karena terdorong untuk setuju karena pertimbangan estetis) terlepas dari kepentingan pribadi; 3) Relasi : purposiveness without purpose-teleologi; 4) Modalitas : keniscayaan (hal yang indah sebaiknya dipercayai oleh semua orang). Pertimbangan estetis menurut Kant sifatnya subjektif dan tidak konseptual. Suatu objek yang indah harus memberikan rasa senang yang tanpa pamrih (tanpa kehendak apapun dari kita).

    ReplyDelete
  18. Supriadi / 16709251048
    Kelas C 2016 Pendidikan matematika – S2

    Dalam Burnham, 2003, menurut Kant bahwa penilaian estetika atau penilaian rasa harus memiliki empat kunci yang membedakan fitur: tidak memihak, universal, kebutuhan dan final tanpa akhir. Estetika erat kaitannya dengan seni. Proses karya seni adalah sesuatu yang dibuat dengan penuh rasa dan dijiwai sehingga menghasilkan suatu karya yang tidak hanya indah untuk dipandang tetapi juga mempunyai makan yang tersimpan di baliknya. Dalam aesthetics judgment, Kant menggunakan istilah momen untuk merepresentasikan estetika atau keindahan. Setiap momen mempunyai tingkatan tersendiri tentang kualitas dan pertimbangan atas selera tentang keindahan

    ReplyDelete
  19. Desy Dwi Frimadani
    16709251050
    PPs Pendidikan Matematika Kelas C 2016

    Kant menganggap bahwa judgment hanyalah sebuah nama untuk gabungan kemampuan fmental lainnya dan berspekulasi bahwa operasi judgment dapat diatur dan diarahkan oleh prinsip a priori fundamental yang unik untuk itu. Kant berkeras bahwa pemahaman adalah yang memasok konsep yang bersifat universal, dan alasannya adalah alasan yang menarik kesimpulan; Menyusun silogisme, dan judgment 'menengahi' antara pemahaman dan akal dengan membiarkan tindakan sub-sumsi individual terjadi; Dia kemudian membedakan antara penilaian yang menentukan dan reflektif.Semua penilaian matematika adalah sintetis, dan semua keputusan matematis yang tepat adalah a priori.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Syahlan Romadon
    PM C 2016 / 16709251047

    Kant berpendapat bahwa penilaian estetika atau disebut juga penilaian rasa memiliki empat kunci yaitu: tidak memihak, universal, kebutuhan, dan final tanpa akhir. Estetika berkaitan erat dengan seni. Dalam aesthetics judgment, Kant menggunakan istilah momen untuk merepresentasikan estetika/keindahan. Setiap momen mempunyai tigkatan kualitas dan keindahan tersendiri.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Elli Susilawati
    16709251073
    Pmat D pps16

    Kant membahas daya pertimbangan estetika atas keindahan dengan menggunakan istilah ’momen’. Setiap momen memuat pembahasan tentang pertimbangan atas selera; selera di sini terkait erat dengan keindahan. Dari penjelasan tentang pertimbangan atas selera pada setiap momen, Kant merumuskan satu pokok gagasan singkat tentang apa itu keindahan.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Elli Susilawati
    16709251073
    Pmat D pps16

    Kant membahas daya pertimbangan estetika atas keindahan dengan menggunakan istilah ’momen’. Setiap momen memuat pembahasan tentang pertimbangan atas selera; selera di sini terkait erat dengan keindahan. Dari penjelasan tentang pertimbangan atas selera pada setiap momen, Kant merumuskan satu pokok gagasan singkat tentang apa itu keindahan.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Wahyu Berti Rahmantiwi
    PPs Pendidikan Matematika Kelas C 2016
    16709251045

    Estetika atau keindahan meliputi penilaian, pengalaman, konsep, sifat dan kata-kata. Pengalaman estetika berasal dari penilaian-penilaian estetika. Setiap penilaian mempunyai tujuan, sama halnya pada penilaian estetika juga ada tujuan secara eksternal dan internal. Dengan demikian, keindahan setara dengan utilitas maupun kesempurnaan, namun tetap purposive. Nilai estetika setiap individu berbeda dengan individu lainnya.

    ReplyDelete