Critique of the Power of Judgment

Kant, Immanuel; Guyer, Paul; Matthews, Eric

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804656.004

Cited by 361 publications

(192 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

192

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first of these maxims requires active and unprejudiced, rather than passive, thinking: otherwise no genuine plurality of perspectives can emerge. 92 The second requires reflection on one's initial judgments from the perspective of all so that any partiality conditioning them can be corrected. 93 Far from being a matter of ascending to a neutral Archimedean point above the conflict of opinions, this process should be oriented toward comparing one's independently formed judgments with the actual viewpoints of others, 94 and taking any discrepancies as signalling that one's reasoning may be erroneous.…”

Section: Freedom As Communicative Autonomy: Kant On Public Reasonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…92 The second requires reflection on one's initial judgments from the perspective of all so that any partiality conditioning them can be corrected. 93 Far from being a matter of ascending to a neutral Archimedean point above the conflict of opinions, this process should be oriented toward comparing one's independently formed judgments with the actual viewpoints of others, 94 and taking any discrepancies as signalling that one's reasoning may be erroneous. Since the results of this reflective movement will constantly be in flux, contradictions in one's thinking can be expected to emerge.…”

Section: Freedom As Communicative Autonomy: Kant On Public Reasonmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Kant, Copyright and Communicative Freedom

Barron

2011

Law and Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid recent expansion of copyright law worldwide has sparked efforts to defend the 'public domain' of non-propertized information, often on the ground that an expansive public domain is a condition of a 'free culture. Yet questions remain about why the public domain is worth defending, what exactly a free culture is, and what role (if any) authors' rights might play in relation to it. From the standard liberal perspective shared by many critics of copyright expansionism, the protection of individual expression by means of marketable property rights in authors' works serves as an engine of progress towards a fully competitive 'marketplace of ideas' -though only if balanced by an extensive public domain from which users may draw in the exercise of their own expressivity. This article shows that a significantly different, and arguably richer, conception of what a free culture is and how authors' rights underpin it emerges from a direct engagement with the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. For Kant, progress towards a fully emancipated (i.e. a 'mature' or 'enlightened') culture can only be achieved through the critical intellectual activity that public communication demands: individual expressive freedom is only a condition, not constitutive, of this 'freedom to make public use of one's reason in all matters'. The main thesis defended in this article is that when Kant's writings on publicity (critical public debate) are read in relation to his writings on the legal organization of publishing, a necessary connection emerges between authors' rights -as distinct from copyrights -and what Jürgen Habermas and others have named the public sphere. I conclude that it is the public sphere, and not the public domain as such, that should serve as the key reference point in any evaluation of copyright law's role in relation to the possibility of a free culture.

show abstract

Section: Freedom As Communicative Autonomy: Kant On Public Reasonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Freedom As Communicative Autonomy: Kant On Public Reasonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kant, Copyright and Communicative Freedom

Barron

2011

Law and Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The self-awareness experience and the aesthetic judgment defined by Immanuel Kant are analogous in that both are based on subjective appreciation of a phenomenon and implication of its universality. This is because the aesthetic judgment is related to the senses of being "purposive without a specific purpose" (a foundation of accepting existence of a specific phenomenon) and "lawful without a specific law" (a foundation of supporting its universality) [10]. Here I conjecture that the selfawareness experiences by the technologies can be a way of understanding ourselves by extending subjective experience to others (aesthetic approach), without assuming objective observation (scientific approach).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aesthetic Aspects of Technology-Mediated Self-awareness Experiences

Watanabe

2013

Proceedings in Information and Communications Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this sense all language is the language of another, or the other, and because of this the site of contesting affect. 64 This brings us back to Adorno, the breakdown of the space of subjective interiority, and the construction a negative space of subjectivity as a border with the formerly constituted subject-through aesthetic emancipation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Affect of Dissident Language and Aesthetic Emancipation at the Margins: A Possible Dialogue between Theodor W. Adorno and Julia Kristeva

Morgan¹

2016

JFFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Critique of the Power of Judgment

Cited by 361 publications

References 0 publications

Kant, Copyright and Communicative Freedom

Kant, Copyright and Communicative Freedom

Aesthetic Aspects of Technology-Mediated Self-awareness Experiences

The Affect of Dissident Language and Aesthetic Emancipation at the Margins: A Possible Dialogue between Theodor W. Adorno and Julia Kristeva

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About