Immanuel Kant

General Observations on Transcedental Aesthetic

[quote]:

To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explai, as clearly as possible, what our view is regarding the fundamental constitution of sensible knowledge in general. 

What we have meant to say is that all our intuition is nothing but the representation of appearance; that the things which we intuit are not in themselves what we intuit them as being, nor their relations so consituted in themselves as they appear to us, and that  if the subject, or even only the subjective constitution of the senses in general, be removed, the whole consitution and all the relations of objects in space and time, nay space and time themselves, would vanish. As appearances, they cannot exist in themselves, but only in us. What objects may be in themselves, and apart from all this receptivity of our sensibility, remains completely unknown to us. We know nothing but our mode of perceiving them - a mode which is peculiar to us, and not necessarily shared in by every being, though, certainly, by every human being. With this alone have we any concern. Space and time are its pure forms, and sensation in general its matter. The former alone can we know a priori, that is, prior to all actual perception; and such knowledge is therefore called pure intuition. The latter is that in our knowledge which leads to its being called a posteriori knowledge, that is, empirical intuition. The former inhere in our sensibility with absolute necessity, no matter of what kind our sensations may be; the latter can exist in varying modes. Even if we could bring our intuition to the highest degree of clearness, we should not thereby come any nearer to the consitution of objects in themselves. We should still know only our mode of intuition, that is, our sensibility. We should, indeed, know it completely, but always under the conditions of space and time - conditions which are originally inherent in the subject. What the objects may be in themselves would never become known to us even though the most enlightened knowledge of that which is alone given to us, namely, their appearance.

The concept of sensibility and of appearance would be falsified, and our whole teaching in regard to them would be rendered empty and useless, if we were to accept the view that our entire sensibility is nothing but a confused representation of things, containing only what belongs to them in themselves, but in doing so under an aggregation of characters and partial representations that we do not consciously distinguish. For the difference between a confused and a clear representation is merely logical, and does not concern the content. No doubt the concept of 'right', in its common-sense usage, contains all that the subtlest speculation can develop out of it, though in its ordinary and practical  use we are not conscious of the manifold representations comprised in this thought. But we cannot say that the common concept is therefore sensible, containing a mere appearance. For 'right' can never be an appearance; it is a concept in the understanding, and represents a property (the moral property) of actions, which belongs to them in themselves. The representation of a body in intuition, on the other hand, contains nothing that can belong to an object in itself, but merely the appearance of something, and the mode in which we are affected by that something; and this receptivity of our faculty of knowledge is termed sensibility. Even if that appearance could become completely transparent to us, such knowledge would remain toto coelo different from knowledge of the object in itself.

 ---

The self transcends the isolation of its own subjectivity, in the clarity of thought presented to us by Kant. The "I" exists limited to its own interpretive "sensibilities", only viewing the phenomenal appearance from its own subjectivity, not knowing "the other" in itself, except through its own interpretive lense. Yet connections are made in the aesthetics of thought, as thinker comes to know its own existence in a lucid and precise manner: "transcendence". The apprehension of the world of phenomena hangs by a thin thread - one's own conciousness of the world of appearance. But the moment of clarity described by Kant, gives the reader a sense of unity-of-the-us, of thought. The process of coming to know "the other" as a thou-of-life becomes the focal point in the life-living of the self, as a being in openness. Is this not the 'right' action in its common sense usage, a sensibitliy to come to understand the soul of the other in the space through the continuum of time?

The clarity of Zen

"the moment"

"the choice"

"affirmation"

"life"

"satori"

---

What more does one have to say?

Berkeley revealed... "a thank you"

"Pristine"...

As the self encounters the being of "the other", the path towards the light of the world-to-come, unfolds in the present-ness of the moment. However brief, the self crosses paths with "the other", as a thou-of-life. The revelations of the world reflect upon the phenomena, as "art" manifests itself in the environment of creativity.

As the oneness of the universe envelops the individual souls, beauty appears in the many modalities, a fullness of expression. For once, a spiritual being transcending the limitations of existence for a being not as an "I" but as a "we" of the community of expressive souls. The wonders, the fireworks going off in the distant, signalling a synchronicity, makes itself known again in a more lucid manner.

Infinite wisdom and the nature of "the other" open for dialogue - the process of getting to know the All of life-living, one moment at a time. The new-ness that seems all so familiar, the encountering of Platon-ic friendships - existence of a vibrant world...

"enchanted"

as the rhythms begin to take hold of the soul of the individuals, the "music" manifests itself in the nature of the created environment - an emanation of light. The objective world becomes a meeting place where individual subjectivities learn to transcend the isolation of the mind. Spirit and identities emerge!

"Nature-ality of being", smells the aroma of the rose for the experience of grounding. The self realizes the "moment", enveloped  by the beauty of nature. A quiet "thank you", a praise to the holy of holies for making a reality known to the soul who finds "the other" on a journey of uniqueness. Majestic and vibrant, a future encounter awaits, as the spiritual domains open up with the liberality of phenomena.

The cycle of the week comes to a close, a resting place for the soul that yearns for the divine. Are we not spiritual beings having the human experience, as the new day begins? The "World-Soul" makes itself known to the "we" of the life-time of experience.

"Thank you, again" 

dialogue

Nature and the representation to the senses (the empirical world), presents a picture of reality in its totality manifested to the self's subjectivity. This picture is like an eternal river flowing - at times rapid and chaotic, at other times peaceful and serene. As inhabitants (as creatures) with the innate ability to consciously understand and know our place in the river, view nature from the perspective of a single drop of water. The ever changing continuum appears to the conscious self as a process for growth and understanding. "I am", as the self emerges from a nothingness towards the All of life-living.

Past and future converge for a moment of awareness sacred and holy, a subtle existence as a being conscious of its ability to apprehend. The river of life, at times can be comprehended from the perspective of the self, viewing its world as a manifestation of its subjectivity (phenomena), and at other times as objective nature without the view towards any single perspective. Between these two lenses emerges the purpose and telos - the unification of these two views - to systematically and artistically represent the process in its life-living - an aesthetic practice - a choice/duty to transcend and go beyond the confines of the darkness for the light of rationality and pure identity.

The nothingness of the self parallels the isolation of the self from the world of nature as a mind and intellect living as a being beyond what phenomenal appearance can transmit. Interpretation is the becoming of the self as a being in its artistic authenticity.

The self beckons the other by asking the question of identity: "where are you"? 

The thou of life emerges - "Here I am"! 

Coffee shop experience

The Self realizes its existence as a confluence of modes passively and actively taking shape in the mind-body nexus of the believer. The "I" is a construct of the narratives it has applied, in creating an identity that transcends mere phenomenal appearance, while the extended self represents its "image" as a will-to-authenticity. The "I" no longer exists as an existent, moving itself for a purposeless cause, but an "I" that is looking for affirmation of the world on unitive terms. Existence takes a new vantage point where the Self becomes acutely aware of both conscious-self (in thought) and the extended-self (as a body). Motion of extended "objects" signal to the mind a necessity to "act" in a normative way as the environment that dictates the ideas of the world onto the self's existence. It is no longer "I think therefore I am," but "I am therefore I think." The dualism of the past, is unified in the present as the moment takes hold. What becomes "truth" is the identity of the self in the present-ness of the moment, viewing the phenomenal with an eye towards "dialogue."

time, aesthetics and life-living

Nature offers the self an outlet to express itself as authentic being, an endeavour to-survive and to-be in a creative way that goes beyond mere functionality. It is the process of the will-to-survive and will-to-be represented in the infinite modes of aesthetic-life-expression, an identity within the confines of time and its eternality. The aesthetic life takes root in living authentically "in time". From this perspective, the self no longer has idle time to swim in its own imagination as a being devoid of practical purpose. Meditation no longer becomes a day-dream, but a practice to fulfill the eternal moment with intent of expressing its ideality onto the course of its own life in the present-ness of the moment. The self emerges out of the darkness of its own slumbers. The conquest of time!

Identity!

How do we begin to express in language our experience of Being. The obliteration of all boundaries of self with nature in which we are left in total awe of existing – a process of self actualization in its most pristine state unworthy of a mortal’s “words.” We are left to ponder and contemplate the unfathomable experience of consciousness on such a subtle beatific vision, where everything infinite makes sense in perfect harmony while in unison with pure confusion of what any and all of Being and existing truly entails. Let me begin by stating: “Life is Beautiful!”


Art is an expression of the different modes of being in the infinite particularities of finite beings in a futile attempt to transcend the experience of autonomy in one’s own realization of self-isolation. The artist reveals his art as pure expression for an abstract telos, where to interpret and appreciate the art is to redeem the essence of the artist in his being-extended in the form of creation. Art abstractly defined then, is all expression in the form of appreciating and communicating the experience of existing and the radical departure and rejection of dualism for an immanent appreciation of being-“in”-the world expressed and interpreted. Dualism characterized as a separation of the domain of the transcendent intellect-soul and the material-physical-phenomenal, and the production of art to unite the two with the medium at hand.


Beauty and our aesthetic taste for subjective particularism must come to terms with the task of finding a standard beyond some hypothetical abstraction such as “the” beautiful in the realm of transcendent form. To fully appreciate beauty in all of its infinite expressions in nature, interpretation of the “is-ness” of experience is crucial. To create boundaries or parameters on “what is beautiful” and “what is not” without close scrutiny of ones inherited tradition of aesthetic categories then is counter intuitive of being able to experience “life-being” as it truly manifest itself. Yet, one can argue even in our liberation of judging with subjective standards and categories of aesthetics, we are still left to reconstruct and develop our own appreciation of beauty. Can anyone, even a nihilist, dare to argue that the angelic are more beautiful than the beasts, or that the philosophers are in someway more pleasing than the politicians? It is as if there is some intuitive realization that a (thirteen-petal) rose in its eternal becoming is pleasing to the soul of the mystic than a field of weeds in its chaos. To create then, a subjective standard based on qualitative-aesthetic judgment, to refine oneself towards the “aristocratic” cannot be rejected, for rejection is to blindly appreciate the perverse standards of oligarchic and tyrannical. [Even these subjective standards of beauty can be argued against for the alternative view that everything is beautiful in its own way no matter how we judge from our own aesthetic taste.]


Contemplation or pure thought, when expressed in the form of language, to paint the picture one comes to be represented in the mind must come to terms with the process of actualizing the vision. Before we will the representation of thought’s vision, the internal dilemma arises – for what purpose is any and all of expression/art? Why extend myself at all? Have I not, through toil earned the freedom and right to my own existence? To offer my words to the most wise and distinguished as if to not realize my youthfulness is to transcend boundaries too daring even for my own standards, while to offer my words as some prescription as if I were already a distinguished physician of the soul is to glory in an arrogant delusion. To extend my thoughts for my own sake, although novel, seems to be an effort not worth embarking on. Can I not exist trying to fully actualize my full potentialities by learning to refine my portrait as an idealization in contemplating my eternal becoming? The infinitesimal task of appreciating the other as a manifestation of nature, to appreciate the “thou” of life can be best, in my own judgment be best accomplished in passivity and being a student of the moment at hand. But the impulse for the artist to shed all vestiges of corporeality, to undress himself and recreate the finer moments of his process to actualize his freedom beyond all costumes that may identify his own being as something “this worldly” is then a process worth embarking on beyond any simplistic explanation. To show himself in pure expression, absorbed in the moment, as if to say “here I am” knocking at the gates to the kingdom of thought, I believe is worthy beyond any need of explanation.


The artist creates “out-of nothing” from the void and chaos that exists in himself, a representation of the world that he comes to behold. Of course, out-of nothing is also symbolic of his own existence from nothing that has culminated in something not definable as chaos or a perfect systematization of anything “specific.” Why should the Monarchy of Beauty be defined and categorized as something distinctly definable by the inherited categories of human language? Is it not an imaginable possibility for the soul of the artist to transcend all boundaries of existence as if to leave behind even his own citizenship in the simplistic “given” political order that modernity has produced for a more aesthetically pleasing existence as a “created being” in the truth of the revealed world? With this self-refined view of the artist’s ideal place in the world comes the realization of a responsibility to uphold imperatives to the transcendent standards (abstractions they maybe) that have come to be embodied in the artist’s soul, the ought to the true, the good and the beautiful – “The lover of love!”