Response Paper No.

Transcending the aesthetic dimension

By

Junaid Faizan
 Transcending the aesthetic dimension

The thesis of Gadamer is built upon the fact that he claimed independence for
human sciences. He first pointed towards the basic problem that method of human
sciences was not of inductive logic of natural sciences. He highlighted certain
philosophers claimed independence of human sciences, but still use inductive logic
method for them. Like J S Mill asserted human sciences have their own logic which is
still inductive. Human sciences also establishes similarities, regularities and
conformities to law so individual process and phenomena could be predicted. But
problem with inductive method is that it is free from metaphysical assumptions and
disregard the conception of phenomena of subject. Ergo, cause(s) for affect(s) is not
ascertained, but merely regularities are established which are not affected by free will.
On the contrary human sciences study society, so social psychology must be looked
upon. Regularity is not criteria for measuring human sciences which involve socio-
historicity. Therefore, historical research not concretize phenomenon as an instance
of universal rule, but should be understood in itself in its unique and historical
concreteness. The aim of human sciences is not to confirm and extend universalized
experiences for attaining knowledge.

Helmholtz divorced logic and opted for psychological artistic method. But, this
too was inductive method even negative inductive. He posited human sciences tied to
particular psychological conditions are practised by induction requiring a kind of tact
and other intellectual capacities. Referring to Dilthey who trying to justify
methodological independence of human sciences. Methods of Dilthey and Schrer was
governed by tact which presupposes spiritual cultivation. Dithey sought for artistic
(feeling and induction) which was distinctive feature of human sciences. But Dilthey
ultimately opted for inductive scientific method and not progressed beyond Helmholtz
in this respect who followed Kant in modelling idea of science and knowledge on
natural sciences. Helmholtz did not believed in intuition or inspirations. He opted
Kantian distinction of freedom and nature and promulgated that historical study is
different from natural science(s) because in it there are no natural universal laws
voluntary accepted practical laws (commandments). Dilthey is referring to the social
norms, customs and laws which person presuppose and believe in when living in a
particular society. But this thought is neither logical nor in consonance with intentions
of Kant. Gadamer pointed Droysen who stressed that history is pivotal point which
stabilizes and progresses human sciences. In essence human sciences have
independent identity and method different from natural sciences. German classics
gave new content to the idea of humanity and enlightened reason.

Herder transcended perfectionism of enlightenment with new ideal of

''cultivating human'' (Bildung) which is concept of self-formation, education and
cultivation. Concept of human sciences which are self-evident are enriched with
history. Herder defined Bildung as rising up to universal of humanity through culture.
Bildung associated with culture designates human way of developing individual's
capacities and talents. Even Kant and Hegel recognizes this. Humboldt describes
Bildung as disposition of mind from knowledge and the feeling of the total intellectual
and moral endeavour flows into sensibility and character. So Bildung is something
more than developing capacities or talents. Ergo, Bildung evokes that man must
cultivate divine essence with which he was made. Bildung not being a goal and having
no goals outside itself, stresses on result of becoming process rather the process itself.
Bildung is continual because it grows out of an inner process of formation and
cultivation. By and through Bildung individual formed becomes one's own. So
everything is preserved in this process, so Bildung has historical character thereby
important for understanding human sciences.

Bildung not only means theoretical concept as, Hegel posits that rising to
universal covers an essential character of human rationality as a whole. Bildung
requires freedom from object's desire (subjectivity) freedom for its objectivity. In
Hegel's terms truly self-consciousness is ''in and for itself'' (practical Bildung).
Therefore, the historical element is recognized in the practical aspect of Bildung. The
spirit of Bildung is returning to oneself of which alienation from oneself is a prerequisite.

But for Hegel, Bildung rise man to a concrete absolute universal ideal which is
not the sense of Gadamer. For Gadamer identifies Bildung as the spiritual element
into which the cultivated person rise. Helmholtz's artistic feeling and tact presuppose
this element, within which mind has free mobility, but he linked this artistic feeling and
tact with general concept of memory which is merely a psychological tool. However,
memory is to be understood as all of brain formation process which includes forgetting
also. Ergo, memory is finite historical being of man. Regarding tact. Furthermore, tact
is tacit and cannot be formulised which functions in human sciences is a feeling and
unconsciousness, and also mode of knowing and mode of being. Ergo, tact includes
Bildung which is function of aesthetic and historical consciousness. Ergo, Bildung is
not universality of the concept or understanding, but is as an abstract percept which
consists in rising above oneself to universality by accepting viewpoints of possible
others. Such consciousness (universal and common sense) is active in every
directions and supersedes natural sciences, ergo is a universal sense. Thereby,
Bildung suggests extensive context which will liberate human sciences from natural
sciences methodology, and human sciences must return, to old method i.e. humanist
tradition.

The concept of sensus communis stemming from Roman classics, Stoics and
natural law signifies importance of this humanistic tradition with which mode of
knowledge is learned. Gadamer refers to Vico's appeal of sensus communis. As per
Vico the concept of wisdom contained common sense and humanistic elonquentia
based on old truths. For Vico, sensus communis had two elements viz rhetoric and
contrast between sophia & phronesis. The latter is important for understanding human
sciences requiring one to grasp circumstances in their all potential variety, thereby
pointing limits of modern natural sciences. Sensus communis is nourished not on true
but on probable and evident education, contributing in formation of sense that founds
community. According to Vico, human will is guided not by abstract universality of
reason but by concrete universality represented by community of a group. Hence,
developing this communal sense is paramount for living enabling one to discover what
is evident. This communal sense by stressing on phronesis lies outside rational
concept of knowledge and individual category is not subsumed under universal
category i.e. judgement. Rather grasp and moral control of concrete situation require
subsuming goal that one is pursuing so right thing may result, hence presupposing
moral being. For Vico sensus communis is sense of what is right and of common good
(found in all persons) which is acquired through living in a community by holding firmly
to value(s) & traditions of that community and is determined by its aims & structures.
Moral and historical existence of humanity is decisively determined by this sensus
communis, thus a reasoned proof is not sufficient. The sense of community flourishes
on its own positive knowledge. History is source of truth different from sophia which
exists in its own right because human passions cannot be governed universal
prescriptions of reason, it is necessary for one to understand sensus communis and
resultantly human sciences. Vico's appeal to Roman concept of sensus communis
influenced even though indirectly to development of human sciences.

The German historical school directly influenced aforementioned development.

Gadamer pointed to parallel of Vico i.e. Shaftesbury who evaluates social significance
of wit and humour under the flag of sensus communis. He posited by sensus
communis indulges the sense of common weal and love of community or society,
natural affection, humanity & obligingness. Unlike Vico, Shaftesbury do not think the
content of sensus communis as mentioned above is not so much a capacity given to
all men, part of natural law, as an intellectual and social virtue of sympathy which is
more of heart than head, thus forming base of entire aesthetics and metaphysics. The
sensus communis influenced natural judgements of common sense, thereby
preserving connections between common sense and society. Good sense contains
the basis of a moral philosophy that does justice to society. Moral element of common
sense appeals to inner energy of an intelligence which wins itself back to itself and
renews adapting principles of reality to new situation through which justice is realized
and is common source of thought and will.

Gadamer opines that characteristic feature of self-reflection of human sciences

not proceed under tradition of moral philosophy to which Vico and Shaftesbury belong,
rather is influenced by German philosophy of Kant and Goethe. For Gadamer sensus
communis was enriched by political content but understood void of it. For this he
pointed towards school of Pietism particularly to Oetinger's appeal to sensus
communis who posited that clarity of concepts (rationalism) is not enough for living
knowledge, rather certain anticipations and predilections must be present. Oetinger
speaking specifically and particularly to Christianity & its scriptures impliedly and
indirectly demanded that human sciences needs generative method which is organic
presentation so justice would be resulted. He sees that in sensus communis the
source of all truth (common truths) is found thereby rejecting rational truths for
humanities. Ergo, Oetinger combined humanistic political meaning in sensus
communis by defining it as vivid and penetrating perception of objects evident to all
human beings from their immediate contact and intuition through which divine mystery
of life in communal sense is to be found which was lost. Oetinger's concept of sensus
communis being theological is to be interpreted as political and social interest. Other
Pietists like Rambach emphasised application against dominant rationalism, but
unfortunately hermeneutic function of sensus communis was not properly grasped by
understanding it as dependant on consensus of feelings, judgements and conclusions.
Gadamer pointed that German enlightenment truly intellectualized concept of sensus
communis.

This development of sensus communis is closely connected with concept of

judgement which is characterized good sense or common understanding. Gadamer
promulgated that moral and aesthetic judgement do not obey reason, but have
character of sentiment or taste. Sensus communis is judgement without reflection.
Logical basis of judgement i.e. subsuming a particular under a universal cannot be
demonstrated. Thus judgement requires a principle to guide its application which
cannot be taught in abstract, but only practiced from case to case because no
demonstration from concepts can guide application of rules. Kant promulgates that
reflective judgement in its true essence demands internal coherence and not
application of universal. But Kant says aesthetic judgement transcends this reflective
judgement in which no concept is given, rather individual object is judged immanently.
Common sense is exhibited in making sound judgement i.e. what is right and wrong.
Gadamer posits that meaning of sensus communis is not to be reduced to aesthetic
judgement, because sensus communis is not primarily a formal (intellectual) capacity,
but already embraces a sum of judgements and criteria for judgement that determine
its content. So universality ascribed to judgement faculty is not common as Kant
thinks. Everyone has sense of community, genuine moral and civic solidarity.
Gadamer in this respect points to linking sense of community to political and social
tradition of humanism and also reliance on humanistic tradition for against
intellectualization of concept of sense of community. So according to Gadamer sensus
communis is an element of social and moral being. By contrast Kant totally excluded
concept of sensus communis from moral philosophy thus also in judgement. Moral
imperative is to detach oneself from subjective judgement and to assume standpoint
of other(s) not in stricter sense. The sound understanding is significant as it is a
preliminary stage of cultivated and enlightened reason not pure practical reason based
on empiricism. From whole range of sense faculty of judgement, for Kant only the
judgement of aesthetic taste being sensory not conceptual is left in which there is true
sense of community. Therefore, sensible judgement of perfection is called taste as per
Kant. Resultantly, Kantian subjective a priori of taste has affected the self-
understanding of human sciences.

Concept of taste was originally more a moral than an aesthetic idea which
describes ideal of genuine humanity. As per Gracian, there is cultivation of not only
mind but also of taste, which is not ideal created by a new society, but ideal of good
taste produces good society which recognizes and legitimizes itself through shared
nature of its judgements or, rather, its capacity to rise above narrow interests and
private predilections to the title of judgment. The concept of taste implies a mode
of knowing and is not private but a social phenomenon. Taste is therefore like a sense
and not operate on reason.

Phenomenon closely related with taste is fashion in which element of social

generalization implicit in idea of taste becomes a determining reality. Fashion implies
changeable law within a constant whole of sociable demeanour. Fashion unlike taste
is indeed constituted by empirical universality. By contrast taste operating in a
community is an intellectual faculty of differentiation. Good taste is able to adapt itself
to the direction of taste represented by fashion. Concept of taste demands that one
observes measure in fashion, not blindly following its changing dictates butt using
one's own judgement, thus maintaining one's own style. Ergo, taste has eye to the
whole, with which everything beautiful must harmonize. Taste has unique special
normative power that it preserves a specific freedom and superiority. Like reflective
judgement, taste belongs in the realm of that which grasps, in the individual object, the
universal under which it is to be subsumed. Both taste and judgment evaluate the
object in relation to a whole in order to see whether it fits in with everything else. Ergo,
taste embraces whole realm of morality and manners. Judgment is necessary in order
to make a correct evaluation of the concrete instance. Aesthetic judgement is even
involved in exercising pure theoretical and practical reason when individual is
subsumed under a given universal. Judgement involves not merely applying the
universal principle according to which it is judged, but co-determining, supplementing,
and correcting that principle. Taste is not ground, but supreme consummation of moral
judgement.
 Social function of taste as mentioned above has humanistic component and
has connections with moral philosophy that goes back to antiquity. But we generally
fail to recognize the ideal normative element in the concept of taste and are affected
by relativistic-sceptical argument about differences of taste. High influence is of Kant's
purification of ethics from all aesthetics and feeling. Kant limited the concept of
knowledge to theoretical and practical use of reason. Furthermore, he limited
phenomenon of judgement to the beautiful and sublime. As a result philological and
historical element is lost causing methodological uniqueness of human sciences losing
its legitimacy and opted method of natural sciences. But Kant legitimatised subjective
universality of aesthetic taste in which there is no knowledge of the object, thereby
hermeneutics and history found a point of contact for the self-understanding of the
subjectivity. So transcending of aesthetic judgement caused aesthetic and historical
consciousness to be self-autonomous. As a result theoretical knowledge was thrown
out of picture, thereby compelling human sciences to rely on methodology of natural
sciences by assigning artistic element, feeling and sympathy of minimal importance.
The critical analysis of transcendence of aesthetic judgement is needed to determine
the autonomous interpretation of human sciences.

Total Word Count: 2522

Peace Out