



Produced by Charlie Howard and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)









Transcriber's note: Boldface text is enclosed in =equals signs=;
  italicized text is enclosed in _underscores_. Other notes will be
  found at the end of this eBook.




  KANT’S
  CRITIQUE OF JUDGEMENT


  MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
  LONDON · BOMBAY · CALCUTTA
  MELBOURNE

  THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
  NEW YORK · BOSTON · CHICAGO
  DALLAS · SAN FRANCISCO

  THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.
  TORONTO




  KANT’S CRITIQUE OF
  JUDGEMENT

  TRANSLATED
  WITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

  BY

  J. H. BERNARD, D.D., D.C.L.
  BISHOP OF OSSORY

  SOMETIME FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, AND ARCHBISHOP KING’S PROFESSOR
  OF DIVINITY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF DUBLIN


  _SECOND EDITION, REVISED_


  MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
  ST. MARTIN’S STREET, LONDON
  1914




COPYRIGHT

  _First Edition 1892_
  _Second Edition 1914_




CONTENTS


                                                                    PAGE
  EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION                                               xi

  PREFACE                                                              1

  INTRODUCTION                                                         7

       I. Of the division of Philosophy                                7

      II. Of the realm of Philosophy in general                       11

     III. Of the Critique of Judgement as a means of combining the
            two parts of Philosophy into a whole                      14

      IV. Of Judgement as a faculty legislating _a priori_            17

       V. The principle of the formal purposiveness of nature is a
            transcendental principle of Judgement                     20

      VI. Of the combination of the feeling of pleasure with the
            concept of the purposiveness of nature                    27

     VII. Of the aesthetical representation of the purposiveness of
            nature                                                    30

    VIII. Of the logical representation of the purposiveness of
            nature                                                    35

      IX. Of the connexion of the legislation of Understanding with
            that of Reason by means of the Judgement                  39


  FIRST PART.--CRITIQUE OF THE AESTHETICAL JUDGEMENT                  43

  =First Division.=--Analytic of the Aesthetical Judgement            45

  _First Book._--Analytic of the Beautiful                            45

  _First Moment_ of the judgement of taste, according to quality
                                                                      45

  §  1. The judgement of taste is aesthetical                         45

  §  2. The satisfaction which determines the judgement of taste is
          disinterested                                               46

  §  3. The satisfaction in the pleasant is bound up with interest    48

  §  4. The satisfaction in the good is bound up with interest        50

  §  5. Comparison of the three specifically different kinds of
          satisfaction                                                53

  _Second Moment_ of the judgement of taste, viz. according to
    quantity                                                          55

  §  6. The Beautiful is that which apart from concepts is
          represented as the object of a universal satisfaction       55

  §  7. Comparison of the Beautiful with the Pleasant and the Good
          by means of the above characteristic                        57

  §  8. The universality of the satisfaction is represented in a
          judgement of Taste only as subjective                       59

  §  9. Investigation of the question whether in a judgement of
          taste the feeling of pleasure precedes or follows the
          judging of the object                                       63

  _Third Moment_ of judgements of taste according to the relation
    of the purposes which are brought into consideration therein      67

  § 10. Of purposiveness in general                                   67

  § 11. The judgement of taste has nothing at its basis but the
          form of the purposiveness of an object (or of its mode of
          representation)                                             69

  § 12. The judgement of taste rests on _a priori_ grounds            70

  § 13. The pure judgement of taste is independent of charm and
          emotion                                                     72

  § 14. Elucidation by means