Advertisement

What Immanuel Kant Would Say About Fashion: The Metaphysics of the Pursuit of the Self by Way of Fashion

Chapter
  • 73 Downloads

Abstract

With recourse to Immanuel Kant, the pursuance of something new, the conceptual side of fashion, can be reckoned as part of the metaphysical domain arrived at by a synthetic a priori judgement, and as an incessant attempt to seek one’s self. Kant’s schematism provides a theoretical foundation to dissect fashion as an a priori concept of the understanding and as a phenomenal a posteriori appearance, thereby demonstrating the difference between the conceptual and the material of fashion. Kant’s transcendental aesthetic clarifies how our intuitions of time and space lead us to comprehend the metaphysical concept of fashion. By grappling with critical attributes in fashion, one can also tackle some of the most complex philosophical conundrums, that is, how noumenon and thing-in-itself are different and how synthetic a priori cognition is possible in our empirical life.

References

  1. Baudelaire, Charles. 1981. The Painter of Modern Life. In Selected Writings on Art and Artist, trans P. E. Charvet. Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Benjamin W. 1999. The Arcades Project, ed. Rolf Tiedemann and trans. Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. ———. 2003. Central Park. In Selected Writings, Volume 4: 1938–1940, eds. Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings, trans. Edmund Jephcott et al. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Eicher, Joanne B., and Mary Ellen Roach-Higgins. 1992a. Definition and Classification of Dress: Implications for Analysis of Gender roles. In Dress and Gender: Making and Meaning in Cultural Contexts, ed. Ruth Barnes and Joanne B. Eicher, 8–28. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  5. ———. 1992b. Dress and Identity. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 10 (4): 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kant, Immanuel. 1996. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. W.S. Pluhar and introduction by P. Kitcher. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 2001. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, 2nd ed. trans. P. Carus and ed. J. W. Ellington. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2006. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View, ed. and trans. Robert B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Paton, H.J. 2007 (1936). Kant’s Metaphysic of Experience: A Commentary on the First Half of the Kritik der Reinen Vernunft. Vol. 2. London/New York: Allen & Unwin/Macmillan.Google Scholar
  10. Svendsen, L. 2006. Fashion: A philosophy, trans. John Irons. London: Reaktion.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Fashion DesignSungkyunkwan UniversitySeoulKorea (Republic of)

Personalised recommendations