Locke And The Categories Of Value In Eighteenth century British Aesthetic Theory

Jerome Stolnitz

doi:10.1017/S0031819100059921

Locke And The Categories Of Value In Eighteenth century British Aesthetic Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 February 2009

Jerome Stolnitz

Show author details

Jerome Stolnitz: Affiliation:
University of Rochester

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

It would be, at this hour of the day, supererogatory to argue the pre-eminence of Locke's influence on eighteenth-century thought. But though this claim has been made often enough,1 and has often enough been shown to be true, it has not been shown for aesthetics. I believe it to be true of aesthetics as well, but that the fact has gone unremarked, because the line of influence here is not so overt as in the case of, say, political theory or epistemology. It is, rather, oblique and devious; that the influence is there at all is, even, paradoxical.

Type: Articles
Information: Philosophy , Volume 38 , Issue 143 , January 1963 , pp. 40 - 51

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100059921 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 40 note 1} ‘The book that had most influence in the eighteenth century, the Bible excepted, was Locke's Essay concerning HumanUnderstanding.’—Google ScholarKenneth, MacLean, John Locke and English Literature of the Eighteenth Century (Yale Univ. Press, 1936),Google Scholar p. v. Cf., also, Aaron, R. I., John Locke, 2nd ed. (Clarendon Press, 1955), p. 303.Google Scholar

^{page 40 note 2} Jerome, Stolnitz, ‘On the Origins of “Aesthetic Disinterestedness”,’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 20 (1971), 131–43Google Scholar

^{page 40 note 3} John, Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ed. Fraser, (New York: Dover, 1959), II, XXII, 10; 1, 387. Italics in original.Google Scholar

^{page 41 note 1} I, 14.

^{page 41 note 2} I, 31.

^{page 41 note 3} Op. cit., p. 307.

^{page 41 note 4} II, XI, 2; I, 204.

^{page 41 note 5} III, X, 34; II, 146.

^{page 41 note 6} III, X, 34; II, 146-47.

^{page 41 note 7} III, X, 34; II, 147.

^{page 41 note 8} II, XII, 5; I, 215-16.

^{page 42 note 1} II, II, 1; I, 145.

^{page 42 note 2} II, II, 2; I, 145.

^{page 42 note 3} II, XII, 1; 1, 213.

^{page 42 note 4} Cf. Aaron, , op. cit., pp. 111-12;Google ScholarJames, Gibson, Locke's Theory of Knowledge and its Historical Relations (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1917), pp. 51 ff.;Google ScholarO'Connor, D. J., John Locke (London: Penguin, 1952), pp. 47–48.Google Scholar

^{page 42 note 5} The passage—II, I, 25—cited by both. Mr Aaron and Mr O'Connor in support of their view is, however, consistent with the original position, for what it says about simple ideas is not clearly definitional and can be construed at least as readily as an empirical assertion. It might further be noted that this passage precedes chap. II, which is explicitly devoted to simple ideas, and also that ‘unanalysable’ is much closer to the meaning of ‘simple’ than is ‘given’.Google Scholar

^{page 42 note 6} Until the fourth edition; cf. II, XII, 1; I, 213-14.

^{page 42 note 7} II, XII, 1; I, 214; cf., also, II, XXIII, 3; I, 392-93.

^{page 42 note 8} II, XII, 1; 1, 214.

^{page 42 note 9} II, XXIII, 1; I, 390.

^{page 42 note 10} II, XXIII, 6; I, 396.

^{page 43 note 1} III, IV, 2; 11, 32.

^{page 43 note 2} II, XXII, 2; I, 381-82; III, V, 2; II, 43.

^{page 43 note 3} III, V, 6; II, 46; cf., also, III, IX, 7; II, 107.

^{page 43 note 4} III, IV, 2; II, 32; III, IV, 17; II, 42.

^{page 43 note 5} III, V, 12; II, 51.

^{page 43 note 6} III, IX, 7; II, 107-8.

^{page 43 note 7} II, XXII, 2; I, 382.

^{page 43 note 8} Gf. above, p. 41.

^{page 43 note 9} II, XII, 5; I, 216.

^{page 44 note 1} III, IX, 7; II, 107.

^{page 44 note 2} Figure is, strictly, a simple mode, but cf. III, IV, 17; II, 42.

^{page 44 note 3} Cf.Aaron, , op. cit., pp. 211, 216.Google Scholar

^{page 44 note 4} III, V, 8; II, 48.

^{page 44 note 5} [Francis Hutcheson], An Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, 2nd ed. (London, 1726), p. 96. The spelling and punctuation have been modernized.Google Scholar

^{page 44 note 6} Cf., e.g., pp. 6, 81.

^{page 44 note 7} Cf. above, pp. 40-41.

^{page 44 note 8} Op. cit., pp. IX-X, 96 ff.

^{page 44 note 9} Anthony, , Earl of Shaftesbury, Second Characters or The Language of Forms, ed. Rand, (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1914), p. 178.Google Scholar

^{page 44 note 10} Cf. Gibson, , op. cit., pp. 21-22; Aaron, , op. cit., pp. 110 ff; O'Connor, , op. cit., pp. 29-31, 41-44.Google Scholar

^{page 45 note 1} Cf., e.g., II, XI, 14; I, 210.

^{page 45 note 2} Op. cit., p. 7.

^{page 45 note 3} Ibid., p. 7.

^{page 45 note 4} Ibid., pp. 5-7; cf., also, p.XIII.

^{page 45 note 5} Ibid., p. 7.

^{page 45 note 6} Ibid., p. 9; c.f., also, p. XIII.

^{page 45 note 7} Ibid., sect. III.

^{page 45 note 8} Ibid., p. 15.

^{page 45 note 9} Ibid., sect. IV.

^{page 46 note 1} Speaking now of ‘absolute beauty’ only.

^{page 46 note 2} Ibid., pp. 17ff.

^{page 46 note 3} Ibid., pp. 8-9.

^{page 46 note 4} Cf. Jerome, Stolnitz, ‘On the Significance of Lord Shaftesbury in Modern Aesthetic Theory’, Philosophical Quarterly, 11 (1961), 110–11.Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 5} Francis, Hutcheson, A System of Moral Philosophy (London, 1755), 1, 15.Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 6} Cf. above, p. 42.

^{page 46 note 7} Op. cit., pp. 7, 9, 82.

^{page 46 note 8} Ibid., pp. 4, 11.

^{page 46 note 9} Ibid., pp. 11-12.

^{page 46 note 10} Ibid., p. 87.

^{page 46 note 11} Ibid., sect. VI. Cf., similarly, [Francis, Hutcheson], An Essay on the Nature and Conduct of the Passions and Affections (London, 1728), pp. XI, 4, 27-28.Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 12} On Locke's use of ‘internal sense’, cf. II, I, 4; I, 123; II, XX, 3; I, 303.Google Scholar

^{page 47 note 1} Ibid., p.7. Italics in orginal.

^{page 47 note 2} Essay on … the Passions, p. 2. Cf. Essay Concerning Human Understanding, II, IX, 2; I, 183; II, XI, 15; 1, 211.Google Scholar

^{page 48 note 1} Op. cit., p. 7.

^{page 48 note 2} Ibid., p. 86.

^{page 48 note 3} Cf. The Works of Joseph Addison, ed. Greene, (New York: Putnams, 1856), VI, 335, 347, 349.Google Scholar

^{page 48 note 4} Spectator, no. 413, pp. 332-33. Addison seems to be using ‘operations’ in Locke's sense; cf. Essay, II, I, 4; I, 124.Google Scholar

^{page 48 note 5} No. 412, p. 329.

^{page 48 note 6} II, VII, 2; I, 160.

^{page 48 note 7} Browne, P. (1697), quoted in Yolton, John W., John Locke and the Way of Ideas (Oxford Univ. Press, 1956), p. 88.Google Scholar

^{page 48 note 8} No. 412, p. 329.

^{page 48 note 9} No. 412, p. 328.

^{page 48 note 10} No. 412, p. 327.

^{page 48 note 11} I, I, 15; I, 48.

^{page 49 note 1} II, XVII, 6; I, 280.

^{page 49 note 2} No. 413, p. 333; cf., also, no. 420, p. 367.

^{page 49 note 3} No. 412, p. 329.

^{page 49 note 4} No. 412, p. 328.

^{page 49 note 5} Alexander, Gerard, An Essay on Taste (Edinburgh, 1759).Google Scholar

^{page 49 note 6} [Henry, Home, Elements of Criticism (Edinburgh, 1762), vol. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 49 note 7} Edmund, Burke, A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, ed. Boulton, (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1958), p. 4. Cf. Essay, I, 11, 28-30.Google Scholar

^{page 49 note 8} Ibid., p. 1.

^{page 49 note 9} Ibid., pp., pp. 45, 91, 129-30.

^{page 49 note 10} No. 412, p. 331.

^{page 50 note 1} What follows is taken, in large measure, from Jerome, Stolnitz, ‘“Beauty”: Some Stages in the History of an Idea’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 22 (1961), sect. II.Google Scholar

^{page 50 note 2} Op. cit., p. 91.

^{page 50 note 3} Ibid., p. 91.

^{page 50 note 4} Ibid., p. 46.

^{page 50 note 5} Ibid., p. 57.

^{page 50 note 6} Ibid., pp. 149-51.

^{page 50 note 7} Ibid., pp. 113-14.

^{page 50 note 8} Cf., however, p. 57.

^{page 50 note 9} Ibid., p. 124.

^{page 50 note 10} Ibid., p. 125; cf., also, pp. 5, 159.

^{page 50 note 11} Ibid., p. 157.

^{page 50 note 12} Ibid., pp. 39, 86.

^{page 50 note 13} Ibid., pp. 58-60.

^{page 50 note 14} Ibid., p. 119.

^{page 51 note 1} I, III, 26; I, 118.

Article contents

Locke And The Categories Of Value In Eighteenth century British Aesthetic Theory

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests