Aesthetics and its Future. Problems and Perspectives

Morten Kyndrup

doi:10.7146/nja.v21i39.3000

Abstract

This presentation argues that the question about “future” presupposesan analysis of the current state of the discipline, which again in turnmust be seen in the light of its history. The presentation then unfolds a roughreconstruction of that history from Baumgarten and Kant, over Romanticism’sestablishing of the partnership with Art and Truth in the continental traditionand up to 20th century’s settling with especially that tradition, led by endeavoursboth within art itself, in the art sciences, and in different branches ofphilosophical aesthetics. On the basis of this, it finally discusses the future ofaesthetics: its status as a scholarly discipline, the need for it in our world, andproposes some issues to be at aesthetics’ future agenda of research.

Highlights

Morten Kyndrup abstract This presentation argues that the question about “future” presup poses an analysis of the current state of the discipline, which again in turn must be seen in the light of its history
Economics is basically concerned with developing means of predicting economic developments
It can be roughly outlined and told in what has been termed a “reconstructive re-description”. This is what I will try to unfold in what follows, my point of departure and purpose still being the question of the future of aesthetics

Summary

Introduction

Morten Kyndrup abstract This presentation argues that the question about “future” presup poses an analysis of the current state of the discipline, which again in turn must be seen in the light of its history. In certain respects this “speculative tradition”, as it has been called by Jean-Marie Schaeffer in his severe critique of it, may have been extremely damaging to art itself by making it – in Schaeffer’s view – “ecstatically cognitive”.9 And in this continental tradition, aesthetics – still according to Schaeffer – has ended up depriving itself of any credibility as a scholarly discipline by insistently conflating descriptive and evaluative approaches.

Results

Conclusion