glim

still reading Kant  with help

fiona Hughes very helpful

most salient thing (for me atm) is the implications of coj for describing how humans relate to each other

kant says we  make aesthetic judgement and part of the mind makeup of such a judgement is an assumption an appeal to the agreement of others.

is this cos we need mechanisms to maintain social cohesion?

then an art object would just be an arbitrary thing serving that function?

I am reminded of descriptions of language that (funnily enough and like Gaul and coj divided into 3) of Halliday (possibly very out of date theory?) that gives 3 functions to language ideational cohesion and interpersonal.  so that questions tags asking for agreement are a linguistic realisation of what is implicit in an aesthetic statement.

Also note that I think an ‘have you seen” question is at same time a ideational question and also a request for an (aesthetic) opinion.  so that have you seen eg latest film will be responded to by an opinion

Also a main point for me from kant is that we are not only rational beings – our behaviour is also derived from non-rational sources (this is obvious I know but it may be a ‘help to think’ idea for me)

Last thing is that i have discovered on my laptop an article by Cath Ferguson about form ‘A Future for Formalism’

must incorporate ideas as seems pertinent to enquiry.

which also brings up the question that `kant talks about aesthrtic judgements entirely from the point of the judgemet making person.  Maybe it should be considered from the pov of the judgement receiving person.

Also need to consider the relational aesthetics that `i have heard of – something connected with this.