Claire Palermo-Re

1/20/2015
PSCI-209
Final Exam
Which Philosophy is Better?
I think the best aesthetical theory is a combination of the theories of Hegel, Plato, and
Shaftesbury. There are parts of all of their aesthetic theories that I agree with, but there are also
parts I do not necessarily agree with. To me the best aesthetical theory would have parts of all
three philosophers. However, out of the three of those theories I like Hegels the best and that is
the theory I think is the best aesthetical theory.
My ideal aesthetic theory would include Hegels idea that everyone is at a different stage
in human development and that depending on where they are depends on what they think is
beautiful. It would also include Platos idea that something beautiful is something simple. For
all these arts are on the watch against excess and defect, not as unrealities, but as real evils,
which occasion a difficulty in action; and the excellence of beauty of every work of art is due to
this observance of measure (Plato 6). Something that is beautiful should be in the middle. It
should not have too much or too little, it should be measured and perfectly in the middle. I do not
think something needs to be extremely extravagant to be beautiful. The last part my aesthetic
theory would include is Shaftesburys idea that beauty can be found in nature. Nothing even of
natural beings worthy of wonder or admiration, but as they show natures real and highest art,
best hand, supreme touches, natures magnificence, symmetry, proportions, highest orders,
supreme order (beyond Doric or ionic, beyond Corinthian) (Shaftesbury 272). Shaftesbury
thought that nature was true beauty. Things in nature are of the highest order. They have
symmetry and proportions. Things in nature are proof of supreme touches meaning proof of

god. Everything in nature was created by god, which makes it the highest form of beauty. I think
that is very difficult to disagree with. Going on a hike and looking down from the top is one of
the greatest views. To me it is always breath-taking to be able to see so much and see how
beautiful nature really is.
Out of all the philosophers we studied, Hegel and his aesthetical theory is the one I agree
with the most. Hegels aesthetic theory reveals spirit. Human beings are driven by the spirit.
Hegel said that everyone has the same telos, only thing is everyone is at a different stage in
development. Telos to Hegel is different than Aristotles idea of telos. To Hegel telos is like your
spirit. According to him spirit is consciousness and truth. Truth is not matter and it is not mind,
but instead truth is a unity of matter and mind. To Hegel something is beautiful if it represents a
stage in the historical context of human consciousness. Every stage of history has different kinds
of artwork that represent it. Beauty is nothing more than what the truth looks like. All human
artifacts and art continue to evolve. The universe is the truth, but the truth is different in different
stages. To make sense of the truth Kant says that we use categories our mind created. Hegel
agrees with this, but he adds that the categories we create evolve over human history. What is
considered beautiful depends on what stage of human history someone is at. Hegel said, Fine art
is not art in the true sense of the term until it is also thus free (Hegel 389). The most beautiful
art is the art at the final stage in human development because that art is free. Humans reach the
final stage in the development of human history when they understand the context. When
someone reaches the end, they understand that their consciousness is not their own. All human
beings are driven by spirit and spirit is the same thing as consciousness. I really like this because
it makes sense to me. Everyone is at different stages in their life or in the development of human
history and that is going to affect what they think is beautiful. A young child and an old man are

going to have two completely different views on what is beautiful because they are at different
stages.
Rancieres aesthetical theory is very different compared to Hegels. In Hegels theory you
decide what is beautiful based on what stage you are in human development. However, in
Rancieres theory the police decide what is beautiful. The police organize all the people into
categories. Rockhill explained Rancieres idea of the police by saying, The police, to begin
with, is defined as an organizational system of coordinates that establishes a distribution of the
sensible or a law that divides the community into groups, social positions, and functions
(Rockhill xiv).The police decide what we see, hear and think. The police gives us moral, social,
legal and institutional rules. The police decide who gets to speak and what you get to hear. The
police is not what we think of by police. Instead the police is the person with the most authority
depending upon the situation. For example, in a classroom the teacher is the police. They have
the most control and them being there influences what you say, hear and see. In other situations
you are the police. You decide what is appropriate to say and can filter what you say. In that
circumstance you are policing yourself. You are the biggest policer of yourself. The police is
always around because you are always around someone else who depending on the situation is
the police, or when you are alone you become the police. Your position or place determines what
you do, think, or say. That is similar to Hegel when he says that where you are in the evolution of
human history depends on what you think is beautiful.
Augustines aesthetical theory is also not very similar to Hegels theory. Augustines
aesthetic theory is things that represent the divine are beautiful. Clearly God in the beginning
made earth out of nothing at all (Augustine 201). God took nothing and created the earth and
everything on it, including humans. That is art. The best kind of art is art that mimic the divine.

Human things should mimic the divine. It should be immortal and simple not elaborate. Gods
law is the truth. You need the grace of god to reach god. However, not everyone is given the
grace of god. Aristocracy and monarchy is a system of control given to us by god. It was a gift
that is supposed to help us. Gods grace gives us rulers and rules that maintain control. To
Augustine the end is when you have received the grace of God and have reached heaven. Only
some people can reach heaven though because only some people receive the grace of god. To
Hegel everyone can reach the end. It takes some people longer than others, but eventually
everyone will reach the end. The end to Hegel is when they realize that their consciousness is not
their own. At that point they are free. Augustines end is when you are in heaven with god, which
can only happen to those that god decided to give the grace of god to. Everyone else is unable to
reach god.
After reading Hegel how I think about ethics has not really changed. Nothing Hegel said
really affected my view on ethics. He mostly discussed the development of human history. His
main idea was that people are at different stages in the human development and that that affects
what they think is beautiful. Based off of that idea I would assume he thinks that same way about
ethics. It does not say this in the book, but based on what it did say I would think that ethics to
Hegel depends on where a person is in the human development. People at different stages are
going to have different ideas about ethics. As a person evolves and moves to a further stage in the
development of human history, they are going to have a better idea or ethics and what is right. I
agree with that statement because logically it makes sense to me. A kid in elementary school and
a college aged student are going to have different ideas about what is right and wrong. As the
elementary kid grows up and moves into a stage further along in the development of human
history they are going to think more like the college student and less like they did in elementary

school. They are at different stages in the human development so they are going to think
differently. In the book it said that Hegels ethical view is recognition. Recognition to Hegel is
recognizing that we are a self-conscious object. At the very beginning we are nothing, that is the
thesis and the idea we start out with at the end. Next in the antithesis in which we realize that we
are not nothing. The final stage in synthesis. In this stage we realize that we are not not nothing.
This continues until we reach the end of the history of human development. When we reach the
end, as earlier stated, we understand the knowledge of the history of human development. At that
point we are free and we recognize that our consciousness is not actually our own. That
realization is recognition. I think Hegels theory of recognition supports my idea that our ethics
will continue to change as we move through the stages until we finally reach the end of the
development of human history, at which point we are free and will know the true ethics.
An ethical issue currently being debated is the issue of welfare. People cannot decide
whether or not welfare is a good thing. They cannot decide who should receive welfare if it is
going to exist and who is going to be okay without welfare. Or how much welfare to give people.
The list of questions goes on and on. I believe Hegel would be against welfare. For a majority of
people at some point in their life they are poor and in need of assistance. However, people who
were once poor have the ability to become rich or at least better off. To me I think Hegel would
consider being poor as just a part of the development of human history. In order to reach the end
of human history one must be poor. To Hegel the solution of whether or not welfare should exist
would be no. People should work hard to evolve to the next stage of the development of human
history. Everyone at some point in their life will be at the point where they could use welfare,
assistance, but eventually they move past that point. To help someone by giving them welfare
would disrupt the development of human history. If people can reach the end without welfare,

then giving other welfare might disrupt the development of human history. Instead people should
just continue to work hard and do everything they can until they can reach the next level of
development. If they continue to do this, eventually they will reach the end of the history of
human development and be free.
To pursue a political project of aesthetic justice some changes would need to be made.
Currently when people make a choice they make it using one of the ethical theories. Those
theories are deontology, consequentialism, and virtue theory. Deontological is when you make a
decision that is in accordance with a moral rule or principle. Consequentialism is when an action
is right or wrong if it promotes the best consequence. Virtue theory is when an action is right or
wrong when it is what a virtuous person would do in that situation. All three of these ethical
theories rely on whether or not an action is right or wrong. In an aesthetical theory of justice
when you make a choice you would make it by determining if the outcome is beautiful or not.
For example, when you make a decision if the result is less beautiful than the original situation
you should not follow through on that decision. If the decision results in something more
beautiful than the original situation you should follow through on that decision. To do this people
need to all have a similar idea of what is beautiful. To me it should be similar to Shaftesburys
idea of aesthetics. I think that things in nature are the most beautiful. The country and places with
not a lot of buildings is more beautiful than a city with millions of people and buildings.
Obviously cities cannot be avoided, but I think there should be less cities and more land that is
left as is. To accomplish this everyone would have to agree that things in nature are the most
beautiful and purest things.

Works Citied

Augustine. "De Musica." Philosophies of Art and Beauty; Selected Readings in Aesthetics from
Plato to Heidegger. New York: Modern Library, 1964. 185-202. Print.
Hegel. "The Philosophy of Fine Art." Philosophies of Art and Beauty; Selected Readings in
Aesthetics from Plato to Heidegger. New York: Modern Library, 1964. 378-445 Print.
Plato. "The Arts and Measure." Philosophies of Art and Beauty; Selected Readings in Aesthetics
from Plato to Heidegger. New York: Modern Library, 1964. 5-7 Print.
Ranciere, Jacques. The Politics of Aesthetics. Ed. Gabriel Rockhill. New York: Bloomsbury
Academics, 2004. Print.
Shaftesbury. "Second Characters or the Language of Forms." Philosophies of Art and Beauty;
Selected Readings in Aesthetics from Plato to Heidegger. New York: Modern Library,
1964. 266-276. Print.