2006
DOI: 10.5840/philtopics2006341/22
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Meaning and Aesthetic Judgment in Kant

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a more recent paper, Guyer distinguishes clearly his own meta‐cognitive interpretation from the more prevalent multi‐cognitive interpretation of aesthetic pleasure. Seel (1988:348–349), Janaway (1997) and Friedlander (2006:25–26; 2015:31–39) explore the former option; Guyer (2006:182–192) defends the latter.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a more recent paper, Guyer distinguishes clearly his own meta‐cognitive interpretation from the more prevalent multi‐cognitive interpretation of aesthetic pleasure. Seel (1988:348–349), Janaway (1997) and Friedlander (2006:25–26; 2015:31–39) explore the former option; Guyer (2006:182–192) defends the latter.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For an overview and competing conceptual interpretations of pure judgements of taste, see Guyer 2006. For some prominent examples see: Seel 1988: 348–9; Janaway 1997: 459–76; Rush 2001: 52; Friedlander 2006: 25–6; Guyer 2006: 172–93.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%