The Evolutionary Theory of Art in Mohan Matthen’s Thought and Its Relation to Immanuel Kant’s Theory of Disinterested Pleasure

Document Type : The Quarterly Jornal

Authors

1 PhD student in Philosophy of Art, Faculty of Law, Theology and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy of Art, Faculty of Law, Theology, and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran‎ (Corresponding Author)‎.

10.22081/jpt.2025.71994.2243

Abstract

This article explores the evolutionary theory of art through the philosophical lens of Mohan

Matthen, a contemporary Canadian philosopher of Indian descent, with the aim of elucidating how aesthetic experience originates as a perceptual-biological capacity. Matthen contends that art should not be understood solely as a cultural or conventional construct but rather as fundamentally grounded in perceptual and cognitive mechanisms that have been shaped and refined throughout human evolutionary history. In contrast, the classical aesthetic framework proposed by Immanuel Kant in The Critique of Judgment introduces the concept of “disinterested pleasure,” characterizing aesthetic appreciation as a subjective experience that is independent of practical or utilitarian concerns. Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology, this study endeavors to bridge these perspectives by demonstrating how Matthen’s biologically informed account can serve as a foundational basis for Kant’s theory of disinterested aesthetic pleasure. The analysis reveals that, despite their divergent starting points—one rooted in evolutionary biology and the other in transcendental philosophy—both approaches offer complementary insights that, when integrated, deepen our understanding of the nature and origins of aesthetic experience

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

زنگویل، نیک. (1395). داوری زیباشناختی (مترجم: محمدرضا ابوالقاسمی). تهران: ققنوس.
شجاع، آرمان؛ مازیار، امیر. (1397). مفهوم علاقه: کانت و آدورنو. پژوهش‌های فلسفی، 12(22)، صص 63‑76.
کانت، ایمانوئل. (1388). نقد قوۀ حکم (مترجم: عبدالکریم رشیدیان). تهران: نی.
گات، بریس؛ لوپس، دومینیک مک آیور. (1391). دانشنامۀ زیبایی‌شناسی (مترجمان: منوچهر صانعی‌دره‌بیدی و دیگران). تهران: فرهنگستان هنر جمهوری اسلامی ایران.
موسوی بهابادی، فاطمه؛ عباسی، بابک. (1404). تبیین لذت بی‌غرض کانتی از منظر علوم شناختی. ذهن، 26(101)، صص 53‑72. https://doi.org/ 10.22034/ZEHN.2025.722128
Berger, L. (Eds.). (2023). Disinterested Pleasure and Beauty: Perspective from Kantian and Contemporary Aesthetics. Berlin/ Boston: de Gruyter.
Dissanayake, E. (2000). Art and Intimacy: How the Arts Began. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Kant, I. (1781). Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Johann Friedrich Hartknoch.
Kant, I. (1788). Kritik der praktischen Vernunft. Johann Friedrich Hartknoch.
Kant, I. (1790). Kritik der Urteilskraft. Johann Friedrich Hartknoch.
Matthen, M. (2014). How to Explain Pleasure. British Journal of Aesthetics, 54(4), pp. 477–481.
https://doi.org/10.1093/aesthj/ayu044
Matthen, M. (2012). Art and the Senses (F. Bacci & D. Melcher Eds.). Art and the Senses. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–25.
Matthen, M. (2016). Seeing, Doing, and Knowing: A Philosophical Theory of Sense Perception. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mohan, M. (2017). The Pleasure of Art. Australasian Philosophical Review, 1(1), pp. 85–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/24740500.2017.1287663
Skov, M. (2010). The pleasure of art (M.L. Kringelbach & K.C. Berridge Eds.). Pleasures of the brain  Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 270-283.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics