Considering both the still ongoing radical uncertainty on the status of aesthetics as well as Hegel’s profound influence on it, a reflection on the reasons, meaning, limits, and alternative options to Hegel’s use of the term “aesthetics” would seem worthwhile. Yet, the extremely copious literature on Hegel’s aesthetics has rarely delved into such issue. While there are several excellent discussions, including some recent and original ones, of Hegel’s understanding of art,4 beauty,5 and aesthetics in general,6 they largely take the received interchangeability of aesthetics and philosophy of art for granted, leaving aside Hegel’s perplexities and variations on the former term,7 both with regard to his philosophical development and to what they might still teach us. This paper briefly addresses such variations, first (1) by laying out and interpreting Hegel’s presentations of his lectures on aesthetics, which can be found at the beginning of both Hotho’s printed version and of the manuscripts of the courses, where the terminological choice is discussed. Secondly, (2) the paper clarifies the double meaning of the term “beauty” with regard to art and hence, thirdly , the reasons for Hegel’s rejection of “callistics” as an alternative name for the discipline (3). In this way, the modest aim of this paper, which constitutes the groundwork for broader future research, is to shed some light on Hegel’s understanding of the discipline he taught under the name of aesthetics or philosophy of art.
Aesthetic Variations: Hegel between Philosophy of Art and Callistics
siani alberto
2026-01-01
Abstract
Considering both the still ongoing radical uncertainty on the status of aesthetics as well as Hegel’s profound influence on it, a reflection on the reasons, meaning, limits, and alternative options to Hegel’s use of the term “aesthetics” would seem worthwhile. Yet, the extremely copious literature on Hegel’s aesthetics has rarely delved into such issue. While there are several excellent discussions, including some recent and original ones, of Hegel’s understanding of art,4 beauty,5 and aesthetics in general,6 they largely take the received interchangeability of aesthetics and philosophy of art for granted, leaving aside Hegel’s perplexities and variations on the former term,7 both with regard to his philosophical development and to what they might still teach us. This paper briefly addresses such variations, first (1) by laying out and interpreting Hegel’s presentations of his lectures on aesthetics, which can be found at the beginning of both Hotho’s printed version and of the manuscripts of the courses, where the terminological choice is discussed. Secondly, (2) the paper clarifies the double meaning of the term “beauty” with regard to art and hence, thirdly , the reasons for Hegel’s rejection of “callistics” as an alternative name for the discipline (3). In this way, the modest aim of this paper, which constitutes the groundwork for broader future research, is to shed some light on Hegel’s understanding of the discipline he taught under the name of aesthetics or philosophy of art.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
