While this book makes a similar if more modest claim for…
““While this book makes a similar if more modest claim for the social significance of its own fundamentally ambivalent “sentiments of disenchantment” (an ambivalence demonstrated by the fact that all are mobilized as easily by the political right as by the left, as the histories of disgust and paranoia illustrate so well), it is useful to recall that with notable exceptions like Hobbes or Niccolò Machiavelli, who made fear central to their theories of modern sovereignty and the state, it is the discourse of philosophical aesthetics, rather than that of political philosophy or economy, in which emotions have traditionally played the most pivotal role—from Longinus to Immanuel Kant on the sublime (perhaps the first “ugly” or explicitly nonbeautiful feeling appearing in theories of aesthetic judgment), to the twentieth-century mutation of this affect I describe in my chapter on stuplimity.””
About This Quote
This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.
Emotions, especially fear and disgust, shape philosophical aesthetics more than political or economic theory, influencing how we judge the sublime and the ugly.
In simple terms: Feelings drive aesthetic judgments more than politics.
Key Takeaway
Consider emotional impact when evaluating art.
Themes
aesthetics
emotion
philosophy
politics
Mood
analytical
critical
Type
academic
theoretical
When to use this quote
- art criticism
- political theory
- cultural analysis
- academic research
Key Concepts
sublime
disgust
fear
stuplimity
Questions to Reflect On
- How do fear and disgust shape your artistic preferences?
- Can aesthetics be judged without emotional response?
A Different Perspective
Relying solely on emotion can obscure rational critique.