Aesthetics

The term aesthetics originates from the Greek word, aisthanomai, that means perception by way of the senses and, therefore, by definition it is always going to be complicated to put a complete meaning on this expressive, sensory response. Either works of art or other objects can have particularly aesthetic characteristics, such as splendor and gracefulness. If they do have characteristics of this kind, they will also have characteristics that are not particularly aesthetic, such as dimension and form and they will be disposed to aesthetic and non-aesthetic judgment, and subject to aesthetic and non-aesthetic appreciation.

It has often been considered that there is a definite position that is distinctive of aesthetic judgment: you have to accept this position in order for the item's aesthetic characteristics to be apparent to you, and if you are in this stance you are in a condition of aesthetic meditation. This suppositious position has often been considered as impartial contemplation based on an item's inherent, non-relational, directly discernible characteristics. But perhaps this vision of aesthetic interest as impartial attention is the creation of male bias, involving the supposition of a position of power over the observed item, an expression of male privilege, a reflection of the 'male gaze'. One more idea is that responsiveness to an item's aesthetic characteristics is the product of a definite species of observation, a position that stands in opposition to the statement that this responsiveness is nothing but the projection of the observer's reaction to the item. In any case, definitions of aesthetics have been provided by a number of theorists, academics, reviewers and artists themselves and are all valuable, in varying degrees, in assisting us to observe things about works of art that we might, on our own, have overlooked.

People frequently declare that something or someone is attractive, but are thrown into steamy circumstances when someone asks them to clarify what they mean. One person claims that a movie is thrilling; another one protests that it was boring. Eaton, for instance, raises the question how, if at all, we can prove our opinion. When we attempt to, sometimes we happen to be even more puzzled. As said by Eaton, it is this concern about how we can discern, that is at the core of aesthetics.

There has been a good deal of written information and more to be written and discussed on the issue of aesthetics and aesthetic knowledge. Henry Rutgers Marshall claims that, "aesthetics psychoses are always pleasurable, but not all pleasures are aesthetic." Kant and others tried to limit aesthetic satisfaction to basics of "disinterestedness" but that was confronted by a lot of other philosophers. They have stressed on the inactive pleasures, holding them to be on their own aesthetic. However, this seems to be insufficient if we believe that the reception of the senses entails responses and numerous inactive pleasures that are not considered to be aesthetic, e.g. the cooling effect of a fan on a burning and muggy day. Even though others have stated that the aesthetic satisfaction is higher in degree than non-aesthetic satisfaction, this cannot necessarily be true? The divergence of the intensity of the satisfaction differs greatly between people. Satisfaction does seem to be an ordinary constituent in all of the theories offered, which is truly so, given that the satisfaction is permanently pleasing in memory, or is the aesthetic experience nothing more than the projection of the observer’s reaction to the item.

Art can indicate the same art for everyone, but it must as well indicate the same art for diverse tastes, which may evenly be relevant to the aesthetic experience. This experience does not match with cleverness, social class, cultural background and so on. What it associates with no one knows, but, the expectation is that in the future, there will be philosophers able to deal with the riches of materials that are still budding.

Order Custom Essay on Aesthetics