The difference between aesthetic judgment and previous judgment is that the latter first establishes a universality (intellectual category) and then specifies particularity, while the former finds universality (sensibility) from particularity.
In this way, it is easy to find the problems of Kant's aesthetics:
1. His definition of beauty is too simple and based on a subjective experience. Art often shows a world, which contains a series of contents that can not simply cause pleasure, and negative emotions such as tragedy, pain and terror are even more incompatible with this simple pleasure, which will cause inconsistency.
2. In intellectual judgment, particularity is not stipulated, because intellectual category is only the abstract identity of form. It does not define the special as universal, but removes the special and abstracts it into universal. In aesthetics, particularity becomes universality with its own particularity. However, because Kant only regards this universality as sensory, he can't explain why a perceptual object can cause universal pleasure, and only limits his achievements to a simple meditation.
3. Kant's aesthetics is just "aesthetics itself", which is a simple formal stipulation that unilaterally separates an object from the whole.
Hegel's aesthetic view can be summarized as one sentence: beauty is the perceptual manifestation of ideas. This is consistent with Hegel's core view of "concrete universality", so beauty is a part of absolute spirit and stuck in perceptual manifestation. It takes the idea itself as an opportunity to trigger beauty. Thus, the question of what causes beauty is answered, so that the unity of particularity and universality in beauty and China is not limited to the field of simple sensory experience, but the whole field of beauty covers the whole reality and all experiences (taking concept as the scale, and the purpose is no longer based on simple sensory pleasure). )