than Natural Beauty

Question: ?Why says Kant in the <<Critique of Judgement>> than Natural Beauty is superior to the Art Beauty!?
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

I believe Kant was wrong in this respect or at least the basic premise is wrong!. This is to assume that art is separate from the natural world which I don't think it is!. Art is the product of human endeavour and we are part of nature!. Art is a product of the natural world to think otherwise is to place humans outside of or above nature!.

On a slightly separate note, the French painter Fran?ois Boucher (1703 -1770) famously said of nature that he found it "too green and badly lit!." Which raises another issue with Kant's statement which is that beauty is somehow an objective state!. I think this is hard to support when everyone has a different idea about what represents beauty!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I don't believe that everything that man produces can be described as of nature!. If that was the case, there would be no need for the word - everything would be natural and your question wouldn't make sense!.

Assume then that there is natural and artificial!. Take two women whom you find equally attractive!. One has been under the knife, the other is unfettled!. Which one is superior!?

By the sounds of things, Kant would have preferred the natural beauty!. For me, she is Representative of all the processes that brought her into being - everything that has gone before!.

The barbie doll would be an artificial representation of a beauty - a man made facsimile without any of the integrity, history or honesty!.

I haven't read more than a few paragraphs of Kant before I decided to give up and go to the pub, but I'll take a punt that he may well have just been trying to say that in a beauty contest between something created by man and another by God, there can only be one winner!.Www@QuestionHome@Com