Kant s Theory of Metaphor by Stefan B. Forrester Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Supervised by Professor Ralf Meerbote Department of Philosophy The College Arts & Sciences University of Rochester Rochester, New York 2008
ii Curriculum Vitae The author was born in Alton, Illinois on December 8 th, 1969. He attended Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville from 1989 to 1993, and graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in philosophy in 1993. He then attended the University of Oklahoma from 1994 to 1996 where he earned a Master of Arts degree in philosophy in 1996. Next, he attended Southern Illinois University at Carbondale from 1996 to 1999 and received a Master of Fine Arts degree in Creative Writing (poetry) in 1999. He came to the University of Rochester in the Fall of 1999 and began graduate studies in philosophy. He received a teaching assistantship and a tuition waiver award from the philosophy department that ran from 1999 to 2004. He pursued his research in Kant s aesthetics under the direction of Professor Ralf Meerbote and received the Master of Arts degree in philosophy from the University of Rochester in 2004.
iii Acknowledgements There are many people I would like to give thanks to for their assistance in preparing this dissertation. First and foremost I want to thank my advisor, Professor Ralf Meerbote, for his thorough and erudite instruction on Kant s aesthetic theory, his many insightful and astute comments on the multiple drafts of this manuscript, and lastly for his much appreciated support and patience during all the stages of completing my degree. Next, I would thank the other members of my thesis committee, Professors David Braun and Paul Duro. Both of them gave me much encouragement, sound practical advice, and aid in clarifying many of my thoughts about the nature of Kantian metaphors and their relationship to art. I also owe a debt of thanks to all of the other faculty members in the philosophy department that I studied with, including but not limited to: Earl Conee, Richard Feldman, Deborah Modrak, Gabriel Uzquiano, John Bennett, and Alyssa Ney. Moreover, I wish to thank many of my fellow philosophy graduate students at the University of Rochester for providing such a wonderfully stimulating environment, both philosophically and socially, in which to pursue my research. Special thanks are due to Dan Mittag, Pat Kenny, Chris Tillman, Andy Cullison, Allen Plug, Todd Long, Rod King, and Eva Cadavid. I also wish to gratefully acknowledge the full-time instructor positions awarded to me by the humanities department at the Eastman School of Music during the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 academic years. Without this wonderful opportunity to teach full-time at the Eastman School, a privilege in its own right, I would not have
iv been able to complete this dissertation. I am especially grateful to Professors Jean Pedersen and Jon Baldo for their gracious and collegial support. Thanks also go out to the department of English and Foreign Languages at the University of Montevallo in Montevallo, Alabama for their support of a tenure-track position in their department starting in Fall 2007. My first year in Montevallo has been very rewarding and productive, and without the caring support of my new friends and colleagues there I would not have been able to finish my degree. My thanks go to all the members of the department, but special thanks go to Professors Michael Patton, Samantha Webb, Betsy Inglesby, Kathy King, Jim Murphy and Lee Rozelle; and very special thanks are due my wonderful and caring girlfriend, Professor Jill Wicknick. Finally, I wish to thank my family: my mother Beth, my brother Rick and his wife Leslie, and my two awesome nephews Nate and Alex, for their patient understanding and loving support during my many degree programs. Without their love and guidance, my life as an academic would not have been possible.
v Abstract When engaging with the fascinating, and historically seminal, aesthetic theory Kant presents in his Critique of Judgment (CJ), the first question to spring to a reader s mind would most likely not be, So what was Kant s theory of metaphor? So, why would one think that this question, which seems to be of only ancillary relevance to Kant s aesthetics, is an important one? I contend that providing an answer to the above question will have significant ramifications for our understanding of some parts of Kantian aesthetic theory, especially his views on the nature of works of fine art, genius, and the communication between artist and audience. My two basic arguments will be that there is, in fact, a metaphor theory in CJ, and that within it we find a statement, somewhat tacit, about how some works of art are created by artists in such a way as to convey a certain kind of aesthetic content to others. Even though some who have studied Kant s aesthetics generally believe that a theory of metaphor is present, this view, I think, still requires some reinforcement. The following three chapters, taken together, are meant to both provide support for that very general claim, and to set out a detailed interpretation of Kant s theory of metaphor. To accomplish these goals, the first chapter reviews the recent (and only) literature on Kantian metaphors and dispenses with one possible, but flawed, interpretation of Kant s theory. The second chapter provides a thorough account of the multi-faceted relationships between many of the important notions in Kant s theory of fine art, i.e., aesthetic ideas, rational ideas, aesthetic concepts, aesthetic
vi attributes and genius. Finally, the third chapter takes the building blocks provided by the second chapter and formulates a Kantian theory of metaphor that is fully integrated into (and supported by) his views on fine art and aesthetic experience.
vii Table of Contents Chapter 1 Why Kantian Metaphors Cannot Be Kantian Symbols 1 1.1 General Introduction 1 1.2 Introduction to Chapter 1 3 1.3 Nuyen s View 5 1.4 Pillow s Criticisms 13 1.5 My Additions to the Richness of Meaning Objection 31 1.6 An Objection from Animation 34 1.7 An Objection from a Curious Comment 42 1.8 Conclusion 44 Chapter 2 Kant s Theory of Fine Art and Kantian Metaphor 46 2.1 Introduction to Chapter 2 46 2.2 The Basic Elements of Kant s Theory of Fine Art 47 2.2.1 Rational Ideas 48 2.2.2 Aesthetic Ideas 49 2.2.3 Aesthetic Attributes and Aesthetic Concepts 61 2.2.4 Animating the Faculties and the Connections Between the Major Elements 76 2.2.5 Genius and the Nature of Non-Determinate Subsumption 101
viii 2.3 Conclusion 128 Chapter 3 Kant s Theory of Metaphor 130 3.1 Kant s Theory of Visual Metaphor 130 3.2 Kant s Theory of Verbal Metaphor 152 3.2.1 Scope of Kant s Main Claim Concerning Metaphors 157 3.2.2 Verbal Metaphors as Aesthetic Ideas 169 3.2.3 Examples 199 3.3 General Conclusion 209 Bibliography 214 Appendix 218
ix List of Figures Figure Title Page Figure 1 Rape of Ganymede 218 Figure 2 The Peacock Complaining to Juno 219 Figure 3 Guernica 220 Figure 4 Virgin of the Rocks 221 Figure 5 The Madonna of the Roses 222 Figure 6 Le Viol 223 Figure 7 Baboon and Young 224