Nov 30, 2012

AESTHETICS_By Marsigit





AESTHETICS
By Marsigit, Yogyakarta State University
Email: marsigitina@yahoo.com



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.


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. 


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.


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.

 

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.

 

11 comments:

  1. Ahmad Bahauddin
    16709251058
    PPs P.Mat C 2016

    Assalamualaikum warohmatullahi wabarokatuh.
    Estetika mengacu pada analisis teoritis bentuk, ekspresi dan simbolisme dalam karya seni. Estetika sebagai kata sifat biasanya digunakan untuk merujuk pada tampilan visual. Misalnya, produk budaya (termasuk 'karya seni') dinilai menyenangkan secara estetis atau tidak. Estetika sebagai kata benda dalam pengertian modern biasanya mengacu pada tubuh teori tentang seni. Ini cenderung berfokus pada dua elemen. Pertama, analisis sifat teori seni, teori seni harus berhubungan dengan bentuk, ekspresi, atau simbol. Kedua, teori tentang karya seni, termasuk pertanyaan niat, representasi atau ilusi.

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

    Estetika merupakan salah satu cabang filsafat berurusan dengan sifat seni, keindahan, dan rasa. Dengan penciptaan dan apresiasi keindahan untuk didefinisikan sebagai studi tentang sensorik nilai atau sensori-emosional, kadang juga disebut penilaian dari sentimen dan rasa. Lebih luas lagi, para sarjana di lapangan mendefinisikan estetika sebagai "refleksi kritis pada seni, budaya dan alam “.

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

    Estetika atau rasa meliputi penilaian, pengalaman, konsep, sifat, atau kata-kata. kata-kata estetika merupakan kata-kata yang biasanya digunakan dalam ekspresi linguistik pada penilaian estetika. Penilaian estetika memiliki ciri tidak tertarik, universal, perlu dan tanpa berakhir, bebas dan murni. Menurut Kant, penilaian estetika mengenai keindahan dari sebuah objek nyata bersifat tidak relevan

    ReplyDelete
  4. Fatmawati
    16709251071
    PM.D 2016
    Secara sederhana, estetika adalah ilmu yang membahas keindahan, bagaimana ia bisa terbentuk, dan bagaimana seseorang bisa merasakannya. Pembahasan lebih lanjut mengenai estetika adalah sebuah filosofi yang mempelajari nilai-nilai sensoris, yang kadang dianggap sebagai penilaian terhadap sentimen dan rasa. Estetika merupakan cabang yang sangat dekat dengan filosofi seni.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Fatmawati
    16709251071
    PM.D 2016
    Estetika yang dipahami selama ini hanya sebuah keindahan yang muncul akibat dari pencerapan indera dan tidak berkepentingan sehingga menimbulkan sebuah kesenangan tanpa kepentingan (disinterested pleasure). Estetika tidak menghadirkan sesuatu yang lain dari sebuah keindahan dari pencerapan indera tanpa tendensi. Perkembangan seni tidak melulu pada estetika yang positivistik, namun lebih dari itu, keindahan dalam arti universal yang menilai sesuatu dapat ditinjau dari segi manapun.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Andi Gusmaulia Eka Putri
    17709251009
    PPs PM A 2017
    Estetika (indah), indah atau tidak indah adalah relatif, penilaiannya bisa bermacam-macam, subjektif tergantung pada masing-masing individu. Bagi Plato, keindahan adalah realitas yang sungguh-sungguh, suatu hakikat yang abadi, tidak berubah. Menurutnya keindahan suatu objek bukan berasal dari objek itu, namun keindahan itu menyertai objek tersebut. Berbeda halnya dengan keindahan menurut Kant, Kant berpendapat bahwa indah itu merupakan sifat dari suatu objek.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Angga Kristiyajati
    17709251001
    Pps UNY P.Mat A 2017

    Terima kasih Banyak Pak Prof. Marsigit.

    Sepengetahuan kami, aesthetics atau estetika adalah studi tentang perasaan, konsep, dan penilaian yang timbul dari apresiasi kita terhadap suatu objek atau kelas objek yang lebih luas yang dianggap berubah, atau indah, atau agung. Teori estetika menyangkut dirinya sendiri dengan pertanyaan seperti: apa itu karya seni? Apa yang membuat sebuah karya seni sukses? Dapatkah seni menjadi kendaraan menuju kebenaran? Apakah sebuah karya dengan mengekspresikan perasaan seni, mengkomunikasikan perasaan, membangkitkan perasaan, membersihkan atau melambangkan perasaan? Apa perbedaan antara memahami sebuah karya seni, dan gagal memahaminya? Bagaimana kita bisa menikmati kesenangan estetis dalam hal-hal yang mengejutkan: tragedi, atau pemandangan alam yang mengerikan? Mengapa hal-hal dari kategori yang sangat berbeda dalam istilah cantik? Apakah persepsi keindahan memiliki hubungan dengan kebajikan moral, dan dengan melihat sesuatu yang universal atau esensial, dan apakah pentingnya pendidikan estetika dan praktik yang terkait dengan hal ini? Apa peran imajinasi dalam berkarya atau apresiasi seni? Apakah penilaian estetika mampu melakukan perbaikan dan pelatihan dan adanya semacam objektivitas?. Dalam estetika lah pertanyaan-pertanyaan tersebut akan diusahakan dicari jawabannya.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Alfiramita Hertanti
    17709251008
    S2- Pendidikan Matematika kelas A 2017

    Assalamualaikum Wr. Wb. Terima kasih atas tulisan yang sangat bernas ini, pak. Estetika adalah bagian aksiologi sebagai cabang filsafat. Estetika selalu dikaitkan dengan keindahan, sedangkan keindahan memiliki definisi yang berbeda-beda (mengandung subjektifitas yang kompleks). Estetika juga selalu dikaitkan dengan seni. Menurut Erich Fromm, seni adalah ilmu pengetahuan sehingga ia mengandung teori-teori yang mesti dipraktikkan. Misal, seni musik: keindahan suara piano tidak mungkin terdengar tanpa tindisan yang mapan secara teori maupun intuisi dalam memainkannya.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dimas Candra Saputra, S.Pd.
    PPs PMA 2017
    17709251005

    Assalamualaikum prof, Penilaian estetik menurut Kant adalah sebuah filsafat keindahan yang menjelaskan kondisi-kondisi subjek dalam mengalami sesuatu yang indah. Objek yang dipahami tidak hanya sebuah karya seni tetapi juga objek secara umum. Aesthetic judgement memandang presentasi objek secara ada begitu saja, yang kemudian menghasilkan perasaan kesenangan. Penilaian ini hmemiliki ciri khas pada pandangan pertama, yaitu disinterested, universal, purposiveness, dan necessary. Maksudnya adalah bahwa kesenangan terhadap sesuatu yang indah adalah tanpa kepentingan dan maksud tertentu (disinterested). Subjek mengenali sesuatu yang indah juga tanpa tujuan (purposivness). Subyek mengenali sesuatu yang indah juga dapat berlaku secara universal, yaitu mampu dikomunikasikan pada subyek yang lain. Maka meskipun penilaian tentang keindahan bersifat subjektif, penilaian tersebut akan dialami oleh subek-subjek lain secara umum. Subjek mengenali sesuatu yang indah juga bukan karena kebutuhan (necessary)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Tri Wulaningrum
    17701251032
    PEP S2 B
    Estetika merupakan satu faham dalam filsafat yang meletakkan titik kebenaran pada suatu “keindahan”. Oleh karena itu, saya berpendapat bahwa penilaian suatu hal berdasarkan filsafat estetika buka tentang perkara “salah” atau “benar”, akan tetapi “baik” atau “buruk”. Estetika, tentang keindahan. Berarti jalan atau alur kehadiran faham ini dilihat dari bagaimana keindahan dicipta dan bagaimana pula manusia dapat merasakan keindahan tersebut. “Merasakan keindahan”, maka saya memberikan pendapat sekaligus pertanyaan kritis pada diri saya sendiri, perihal cara aktor estetika merasakan keindahan yang dicipta dan yang dihadapinya. “Merasakan keindahan” tersebut apakah menggunakan indera manusia? Seperti melihat dan yang lainnya. Statemen saya ini membawa saya melihat pendapat yang saya ketik sebelumnya, membawa saya untuk melengkapi pendapat saya. Jika sebelumnya saya berpendapat jika estetika adalah faham yang melihat bagaimana keindahan diciptakan dan bagaimana manusia bisa merasakannya, maka sekarang ditambah satu lagi, yaitu bagaimana manusia menilai keindahan yang dirasakannya tersebut. Terimakasih

    ReplyDelete
  11. Tri Wulaningrum
    17701251032
    PEP S2 B
    Estetika merupakan satu faham dalam filsafat yang meletakkan titik kebenaran pada suatu “keindahan”. Oleh karena itu, saya berpendapat bahwa penilaian suatu hal berdasarkan filsafat estetika buka tentang perkara “salah” atau “benar”, akan tetapi “baik” atau “buruk”. Estetika, tentang keindahan. Berarti jalan atau alur kehadiran faham ini dilihat dari bagaimana keindahan dicipta dan bagaimana pula manusia dapat merasakan keindahan tersebut. “Merasakan keindahan”, maka saya memberikan pendapat sekaligus pertanyaan kritis pada diri saya sendiri, perihal cara aktor estetika merasakan keindahan yang dicipta dan yang dihadapinya. “Merasakan keindahan” tersebut apakah menggunakan indera manusia? Seperti melihat dan yang lainnya. Statemen saya ini membawa saya melihat pendapat yang saya ketik sebelumnya, membawa saya untuk melengkapi pendapat saya. Jika sebelumnya saya berpendapat jika estetika adalah faham yang melihat bagaimana keindahan diciptakan dan bagaimana manusia bisa merasakannya, maka sekarang ditambah satu lagi, yaitu bagaimana manusia menilai keindahan yang dirasakannya tersebut. Terimakasih

    ReplyDelete