PlETRO PlMPINELLA

TRUTH A N D PERSUASION IN BAUMGARTEN'S AESTHETICA

IN RELATION TO CROCE'S CRITICISM*

The Aesthetica of Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten, as is known, gave its

name to the modern theory of art.1 The work was originally published in
two volumes, in 1750 and 1758 respectively. Both the concept and the term
make their first appearance in the short work written in his youth Medi-
tationes philosophicae de nonnullis ad poema pertinentibus (1735).2
In this early work Baumgarten justifies his choice of the term 'aestheti-
ca' as follows: The Greek philosophers and the Church fathers have al-
ready carefully distinguished between things perceived () and things
known () [...]. Things known are to be known by the superior faculty
as the object of logic; things perceived are to be known by the inferior fac-
ulty, as the object of the science of perception, or aesthetic. 3 As the reflec-
tions on art in the early work are restricted to poetry, aesthetics is identified
with philosophical poetics or the science of poetics, namely with the sci-
ence guiding sensate discourse to perfection. 4

* This text is the extended version of a paper given at the conference of the Eighth
International Congress on the Enlightenment (Bristol 21-27 July 1991). I wish to thank John
Ward, Charles Davis, Gill Bepler (Wolfenbttel) for their help in revising the English text of
the first draft and Felicity Lutz for the revision and partial translation of the final text.
. G. BAUMGARTEN, Aesthetica, G. Olms Verlag, Hildesheim-Ziirich-New York,
1986.
2
The english translations of the passages are from A. G. BAUMGARTEN, Reflections on
poetry. Meditationes philosophicae de nonnullis ad poema pertinentibus, translated with the Original
T e x t , a n I n t r o d u c t i o n , a n d N o t e s , b y KARL ASCHENBRENNER a n d WILLIAM B . HOLTHER,
University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1954. As far as I know, the Aestheti-
ca has never been translated into English.
3
Ibid., 116: Existente definitione, terminus definitus excogitari facile potest, graeci
iam philosophi et patres inter et sedulo semper distinxerunt, satisque apparet
iis non solis aequipollere sensualibus, quum absentia etiam sensa (ergo phantasmata)
hoc nomine honorentur. Sunt ergo cognoscenda facltate superiorum obiectum logi-
ces, , sive Aestheticae.
4
Ibid., 115: Philosophie potica est per 9 scientia ad perfectionem dirigens oratio-
nem sensitivam. See ibid., 9: Oratio sensitiva perfecta est Poema, complexas regularum
 35
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica

est Aesthetica (lgica facultatis cognoscitivae inferioris).9 To what end does

aesthetics as the logic of the lower cognitive faculty guide sensate cogni-
tion? The answer is given with all desirable clarity in the Aesthetica. Aestheti-
ces finis est perfectio cognitionis sensitivae, qua talis. Haec autem est pulcri-
tudo.10
We are now able to state some major theses of Baumgarten's aesthet-
ics:
First: Beauty means the perfection of sensate cognition.
Second: Sensate cognition springs from the lower part of the cognitive
faculty, which is a different source of cognition from the higher part, which
is understanding and reason.
Third: The logic of the higher part of the cognitive faculty is logic in
the traditional and narrow sense, whose aim is the perfection of intellectual
cognition: Lgica [. . .] est philosophia cognitionis intellectualis perficien-
dae.11 Aesthetics on the other hand is the philosophy or the science of sen-
sate cognition, whose perfection is beauty.
As the two parallel definitions show, Baumgarten constructs his no-
tion of aesthetics in a strictly analogous manner to the concept of logic in
the narrow sense, so that the divisions of the latter are also valid for the for-
mer: aesthetica naturalis corresponds to lgica naturalis, aesthetica artifialis to lgi-
ca artificialis}2 The same may also be said as regards the division of both dis-
ciplines into connata and acquisita. The parallelism is confirmed by the fact
that Baumgarten considers logic in the narrow sense to be the elder sister of
aesthetics: soror eius natu maior.13

9
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Metaphysica (Editio VII), G . Olms Verlag, Hildesheim-New York
1982, 533.
10
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 15.
11
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Acroasis lgica in Christianum L. B. De Wolff, in Chr. Wolff, Gesam-
melte Werke, III. Abt.-Materialien und Dokumente, Bd. 5, G. Olms, Hildesheim-Zrich-New
York 1983, 9.
12
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 2-3: Naturalis facultatum cognoscitivarum in-
feriorum gradus solo usu citra disciplinalem culturam auctus Aesthetica Naturalis dici potest,
et distingu, sicuti lgica naturalis solet, in connatam, ingenium pulcrum connatum, et
acquisitam, et haec denuo in docentem et utentem. Ad naturalem accedentis artificialis aes-
thetices, usus inter alios maior erit [. . .]. See also Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 2: Wir ma-
chen hier eine Einteilung wie in der Logik. Ein jeder brachte ein natrliches Vermgen zu
schlieen mit auf die Welt, das er durch Regeln der Kunst verbesserte. Ein jeder bringt auch
ein natrliches Vermgen schn zu denken mit auf die Welt, das eben wie jenes in der Logik
durch Regeln verbessert werden kann; und wir knnen hier das Verhltnis setzen: Wie sich
die knstliche Logik zur natrlichen verhlt, so verhlt sich die knstliche sthetik zur natr-
lichen.
13
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 13. See also Kollegium cit., 13: Wir nennen die
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica 35

tive features of ideas and not their psychological source. Baumgarten, how-
ever, following Wolff, related the different species of ideas to different parts
of the cognitive faculty, while referring distinct representations to the high-
er part. Thus within the broad framework of human cognition Baumgarten
divides the field of intellectual knowledge: horizontem logicum (territo-
rium et sphaeram rationis et intellectus) from the field of aesthetic knowl-
edge: horizontem aestheticum (territorium et sphaeram pulcri rationis ana-
logi).17
In spite of the continuity between the different species of ideas, the
two fields of human knowledge are quite sharply divided. Intellectual
knowledge refers to understanding and reason, sensate knowledge refers to
the analogon rationis, namely the complex of powers, that make up sensate
cognition and include not only the senses but also, and preeminently, the
capacity to grasp the nexus between sensations in a confused manner. 18 This
capacity consists in such powers as sensate wit, sensate perspicacity, sensate
memory, the faculty of imagining, the faculty of judging, the expectation of
similar cases, the sensate characteristic faculty. 19 All these powers are re-
quirements of that part of the character of the successful artist, which
Baumgarten terms ingenium venustum et elegans connatum. 20 Another
very important part of the character felicis aesthetici is the artistic temper-
ament, temperamentum aestheticum connatum, which includes the capac-
ity for enthusiasm, that is impetus aestheticus, pulchra mentis incitatio,
.21
So far I have attempted to sketch some basic features of Baumgarten's
conception of aesthetics as the science of sensate cognition, and of the na-

17
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 119.
18
A. G. BAUMGARTEN, Metaphysica cit., 640: [. . .] Analogon rationis, complexum fa-
cultatum animae nexum confuse repraesentantium.
19
Ibid., 640: Nexum quorundam confuse, quorundam distincte percipio. Ergo habeo
intellectum nexum return perspicientem, i. e. Rationem, et facultates nexus confusius cogno-
scentes, quales 1) inferior facultas identitates rerum cognoscendi, quo ingenium sensitiv um,
2) inferior facultas diversitates rerum cognoscendi, quo acumen sensitivum pertinet, 3) me-
moria sensitiva, 4) facultas fingendi, 5) facultas diiudicandi, quo judicium sensitivum, 6) ex-
pectatio casuum similium, 7) facultas characteristica sensitiva. Hae omnes, quatenus in re-
presentando rerum nexu rationi similes sunt, constituunt Analogum Rationis, complexum
facultatum animae nexum confuse repraesentantium. See URSULA FRANCKE, Kunst als Er-
kenntnis. Die Rotte der Sinnlichkeit in der sthetik des A. G. Baumgarten, Studia Leibnitiana Sup-
plementa 9 (1972).
20
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 29: <Ad naturam, de qua 28. 1) Ingenium ve-
nustum et elegans connatum, ingenium latius dictum connatum cuius facultates inferiores fa-
ilius excitentur et ad elegantiam cognitionis apta proportione conspirent.
21
Ibid., 78.
Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten 's Aesthetica 27

the model of the concept of perfection from Leibniz's theory of possible

worlds. The actual world, which exists, is only one of an infinite number of
possible worlds that could have existed. God chose the actual world be-
cause it is the best of all possible worlds, for He does nothing without a rea-
son. 'Best' in this connection is explained as 'containing the most essence'
or as 'achiving maximum effect with minimum outlay' or as 'most perfect,
that is, simplest in its laws and richest in phenomena'. 24 All these for-
mulations are equivalent, but the last is the most useful for explaining
Baumgarten's concept of aesthetic perfection: the more perfect a work of
art, the more comprehensive will be its constituent elements and the more
they will display harmonious unity: We observed a little while ago that the
poet is like a maker or a creator. So the poem ought to be like a world.
Hence by analogy whatever is evident to philosophers concerning the real
world, the same ought to be thought of a poem.25
Before Baumgarten, Leibniz and Wolff only ascribed perfection to log-
ical truth in the narrow and specific sense. According to them, a cognition
is most perfect insofar as it is a distinct, complete, adequate and, but only
for Leibniz, also intuitive, namely insofar as it accomplishes all degrees of
logical distinction. Unlike Leibniz and Wolff, Baumgarten also claims per-
fection for sensate cognition, which is obscure, clear and confused. Hence
he identifies beauty with the perfection of such a cognition, which is ulti-

des Mannigfaltigen zu Einem (unbestimmt was es sein sollte), giebt fr sich ganz und gar
keine objektive Zweckmigkeit zu erkennen; weil da von diesem einem als Zweck (was das
Ding sein sollte) abstrahiert wird, nichts als die subjective Zweckmigkeit der Vorstellungen
im Gemthe des Anschauenden brig bleibt [. . .]. (Kritik der Urtheilskrafi cit., p. 227). Ac-
cording to Baumgarten the focus perfections or the Grund der Vollkommenheit of a work of art is
yielded by thematic unity: Id cuius repraesentatio aliarum in oratione adhibitarum rationem suffiden-
tem continet, suam vero non habet in aliis, est Thema. Si plura fuerint themata, non sunt connexa;
pone enim A esse thema, item, si fuerint connexa aut ratio sufficiens A est in aut xo
in A, ergo aut aut A non est thema. Jam vero nexus est poeticus; ergo poema unius thematis
perfectius illo, eut plura themata. Hinc intelligimus Horatii illud: Sit quod vis {seil, ultimate repraesen-
tar) simplex duntaxat et unum (Meditationes cit., 66 67).
24
See . MATES, The Philosophy of Leibni% Metaphysics and Language, Oxford - New York,
1986 (chap. IV: Possible Worlds). Despite Mates' reservation : It is by no means clear, even
within Leibnitian doctrine, that these conditions, whatever they may mean, are equivalent to
one another {ibid., p. 70), the quoted formulations may be assumed as equivalent. See also
A. HEINEKAMP, ZU den Begriffen realitas, perfectio und bonum metaphysicum bei Leibnt% Akten des
internationalen Leibniz-Kongresses, Hannover, 14. 19. November 1966, Bd. I, Studia
Leibnitiana Supplementa, Wiesbaden 1968, pp. 207-222 and G. RONCAGLIA, Cum Deus cal-
culai God's Evaluation of Possible Worlds and Logical Calculus, Topoi, vol. 9, 1, 1990.
25
A. G. BAUMGARTEN, Meditationes cit., 68: Dudum observatum est, poetam quasi
factorem sive creatorem esse, hinc poema esse debet quasi mundus. Hinc ' de
eodem tenenda, quae de mundo phlosophis patet.

3
 35
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica

physical reality or truth, are both subjective.31 But the way of mirroring it
differs in the two types of knowledge. Rational truth is proper to general
concepts and general judgements.32 General knowledge is reached through
abstraction, insofar as the individual features of an object, precisely those
features which make it a particular and concrete thing, that is ens omnimode
determinatum, are left out of consideration.33 Formal logical truth is attained
at the expense of material or concrete truth.34 On the contrary aesthetic
knowledge mirrors metaphysical reality in the richness of its concreteness
and therefore possesses more metaphysical reality than logical reality. The
more determined the manner in which aesthetic knowledge mirrors an indi-
vidual in the richness of its determinations, the more it attains metaphysical
truth.35 Thus Baumgarten sets the material perfection (perfectio materialis) of
aesthetic knowledge against the formal perfection (perfeco formalis) of logical
knowledge. In a work of art what is lost in formal perfection, is regained in
material perfection: what is abstraction if not the loss of determinate reality?

31
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 424: Posset metaphysica Veritas obiectiva, ob-
jective verorum repraesentatio in data anima subiectiva did Veritas, vel etiam in verbis faciles
logicam eandem dicamus cum plurimis, sed latius, ut in re conveniamus, cuius potissimum
caussa haec repetuntur aliquantulum altius. Iam enim reor liquidum esse, Veritatem, meta-
physicam, vel obiectivam quum dixeris, ut lubet, in anima data sic repraesentatam, ut det in
eadem veritatem logicam latius dictam, vel mentalem et subiectivam, nunc obversari in-
tellectui potissimum in spiritu, dum est in distincte perceptis ab eodem, Logicam Strictius
Dictam, nunc obversari analogo rationis, et facultatibus cognoscendi inferioribus, vel unice,
vel potissimum, aestheticam .
32
Ibid.., 440: Veritas Aestheticologica vel est universalium et notionum, iudiciorum-
que generalium, vel singularum et idearum. Ilia Generalis, haec Singularis esto.
33
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Metaphysica cit. 148: Complexus omnium determinationum in
ente compossibilium est Omnmoda eius Determinado. Hinc ens aut est omnimode de-
terminatum, aut minus. Illud est Singulare, (individuum), hoc Universale.
34
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 5 6 0 : Equidem arbitror philosophis apertissi-
mum esse iam posse, cum iactura multae magnaeque perfectionis in cognitione et veritate
lgica materialis emendum fuisse, quicquid ipsi perfectionis formalis inest praecipuae. Quid
est abstractio, si iactura non est? See ibid., 558: Hinc humanum veritatis Studium nunc
formalem [perfectionem] potissimum intendit, quod fieri non potest sine dispendio materia-
lis, nunc materialem [perfectionem] potissimum amplectitur, neque potest idem, nisi cum
detrimento formalis.
35
Ibid., 440: Veritatis generalis in obiecto nunquam tantum veritatis metaphysicae de-
tegitur, praesertim sensitive, quantum in obiecto veritatis singularis. Quoque generalior est
Veritas aestheticologica hoc minus veritatis metaphysicae in eiusdem obiecto, et omnino, et
praesertim analogo rationis, repraesentatur. See also ibid. 561: Iam supponatur veritatis
aestheticologicae Studium aliquando f e m praesertim in perfectionem eiusdem materialem, et
hinc amplecti obiecta veritatis metaphysicae, quae potest, determinatissimae.
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica 35

characteristic traits is different from that between mediate characteristic

traits. The notae mediatae are in a subordinate relation from the nota nfima to
the nota maxima, through a progressive process of abstraction that involves
all the intermediate characteristic traits. On the contrary, the notae immediatae
are in a relation of juxtaposition, given that there cannot be a relation of
subordination between them, since by definition none of them is the char-
acteristic trait of a characteristic trait, but they are all equally characteristic
traits of the same thing (notae ipsius ret).40 The characteristic traits of exten-
sively clear knowledge can therefore be known only through cognitio sensitiva.
Extensive clarity is the instrument for obtaining richness of content
which is the attribute of knowledge in its most beautiful form and thus for
attaining the determinate reality which characterizes individuals: In the ex-
tensively very clear representations more is represented in a sensate way
than in those less clear; therefore, they contribute more to the perfection of
a poem. For this reason extensively clearer representations are especially
poetic.41
Since Leibniz does not find any logical means of deducing the concept
of individual, he has to admit, the only means of knowing individuals is to
observe them. Baumgarten becomes aware that mere observation (experientia
stricte dicta) does not suffice for the purpose of perfectio cogitionis sensitivae,
which aims to represent individuals. As individuals mirror each other and
the endless universe, most representations of them remain obscure. An artist
must therefore be ready to permit obscure representations to arise, repre-
sentations which, as Baumgarten says, lie in the fundus animae, in the depths

40
Kant, who used Meier's Auszug as the basic text for his logic lectures, defines the rela-
tion between the notae immmediatae as a relation of coordination: Es giebt aber auch ein Ver-
haeltnis der Coordination, und diese findet bey unmittelbaren Merckmalen statt, alwo ein
jedes besonderes Merckmal ein neuer Erkenntnis-Grund ist {Logik Blomberg, in Kant's gesam-
melte Schriften cit., Bd. XXIV: Kants Vorlesungen, Bd. I, Berlin 1966, p. 108). Kant {ibid) specifies
that the relation of subordination is closed between the nota nfima and the nota summa, where-
as the relation of coordination is open and can be compared to an infinite line. The Kantian
commentary is usefull for clarifing two aspects of the Baumgartian logic of aesthetics: firsdy
it is easier to understand why Baumgarten considers every perceptio as ratio alterius perceptions
and reinterprets the rhetorical concept of argumentum as perceptio {Aesthetica, 26 and 540:
Perceptio quatenus est ratio, est Argumentum; Ergo et omnis ad cogitandum materies, ra-
tio alterius perceptionis, perceptio); secondly it is easier to understand why the characteristic
traits of an extensively clear perception, that are therefore in a relation of coordination, can
be known only by the faculties of sensate cognition, which Baumgarten comprehensively
calls analogon rationis.
41
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes cit., 17: In extensive clarissimis repraesentationi-
bus plura repraesentantur sensitive quam in minus Claris, ergo plura faciunt ad perfectionem
poematis. Hinc repraesentationes extensive clariores sunt maxime poeticae>.
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica 35

makes up the mundus poetarum.11,1 But how may fictions, both the so-called
true fictions and the so-called heterocosmic fictions, be compatible with veri-
tas potica? The concept offigmenta vera may appear at first glance to be quite
inconsistent. Baumgarten himself is aware of this problem and in the Aesthe-
tica he struggles mightily to resolve this complex question.48 The key to the

notion of heterocosmic fiction can be traced back to this wolffian theory. See Aesthetica,
op. cit., 441: Hinc Veritas singularis de contingentibus aut ea sistit, ut possibilia et partes
huius universi, et haec Veritas cum veritate absolute necessariorum maxima dicitur Strictis-
sime, popularique sermone simpliciter, Veritas, aut ut possibilia alterius universi, eiusque
partes, cognitioni hominum mediae, Veritas Heterocosmica.
41
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 513. Cfr. Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 513:
Der ganze Inbegriff aller Vorstellungen von anderen Zusammenhngen, die Dichter und
witzige Kpfe schon ausgedacht haben, ist die Welt der Dichter and 525: Wir sind nicht
Sklaven der Dichterwelt, man kann auch etwas setzen, was andere vor uns nicht geset-
zet. [. . .] Der groe Haufen wird das, was wir von den Erdichtungen gesagt haben, Lgen
nennen; allein der Vernnftige, der die Regeln kennet, wird es nicht zugeben. Es sind Wahr-
heiten und zuweilen sehr groe Wahrheiten, die in einem anderen Zusammenhange htten
geschehen knnen und die zu meinem Endzwecke bequemer sind als die Begebenheiten aus
diesem Zusammenhange der Dinge.
48
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 478: Quousque tandem abutere patientia nostra?
quamdiu nos etiam furor iste tuus eludat? Quem adfinem sese ejfraenata iactabit audacia? Tunc vero ma-
gister veritatis lgica ac aethicae publice constitutus mendacia commendes, velut aliquando
splendida, et falsa veris miscere, tanquam operam maximopere nobilem? Hac ego circiter ra-
tione videor audire mihi quosdam obloquentes [. . .] and ibid., 471: Quid autem illud est
ambiguitatis? Nunc falsa conceduntur, nunc denuo dissuadentur aesthetico? Die sententiam
explicite. Benedetto Croce quotes the above passages and considers them as manifesting a
difficulty from which Baumgarten is not able to extricate himself ( . C R O C E , Rileggendo cit.,
p. 12). See also p. 10: "Tuttavia, quella definizione, quell'enunciato [the definition of beauty
as perfectio cognitionis sensitiva^, che fu il maggior contributo del Baumgarten alla scienza estti-
ca, fu anche il limite oltre il quale egli non pot andar, e che non pot pensare e determinare
nei particolari, senza, in quel conato, essere spmto o respinto verso vie erronee o impigliarsi,
vanamente dibattendosi, in un labirinto inestricabile". This severe judgement cannot conceal
that Croce was the first in modern times to re-estimate the importance of Aesthetica. He ac-
knowledges that Baumgarten has the merit of being, with certain limitations, the inventor of
a new science: Se anche il Baumgarten avesse errato nel venir poi a determinare quel che il
proprio della poesa, resterebbe sempre che egli intravide, present o indovin, e afferm,
che la poesa ha qualcosa di originale e bisogna perci assegnarle una posizione indipendente
e una scienza corrispondente, e, per bene fermare questo punto, confer a questa scien2a un
nome che le fosse proprio e che le rimase acquisito {ibid., p. 6). However, though Croce
maintains that he wants to give a historical judgement of Baumgarten's aesthetics {ibid. p. 16-
17), his attitude is to measure Baumgarten's theses against his own theoretical convictions or
at least to want to distinguish 'what is alive from what is dead' in Baumgarten, under the as-
sumption that what is worth preserving in Baumgarten's Aesthetica re-emerges in his own Es-
ttica ( . C R O C E , Esttica come scienza dell'espressione e lingistica generale, Laterza, Bari 1922). In
this work his criticism of Baumgarten is even more severe: In tutta l'Estetica del Baum-
garten, fuori del titolo e delle prime definizioni, si sente la muffa dell'antiquato e del comune
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica 35

elaborating what from a logical and metaphysical point of view constitutes

an essential and revolutionary contribution to the modern theory of art.
Baumgarten has succeeded in bringing back the categories of traditional
rhetoric to the philosophical grounds of aesthetics and in expounding the
latter through the former. Failure to appreciate this aspect of Baumgarten's
ideas, precludes an understanding of the meaning and importance of Baum-
garten's aesthetic thought.
Baumgarten divides the first part of his Aesthetica, namely aesthetica arti-
ficialis docens, into six points, that correspond to the six major tasks of the
successful artist (curae felis aesthetici).51 He relates these tasks to six classes of
argumenta, richness of content, ubertas related to argumenta locupletantiar, great-
ness or nobility of content, magnitudo related to argumenta augentia, truth, veri-
tas related to argumenta probantia\ light, lux related to argumenta illustrantia, per-
suasion, persuasio related to argumenta persuasoria, vividness, vita related to ar-
gumenta moventia.52

51
Prima cura sit in rebus cogitandis Ubertas (copia, abundantia, multitudo, divides,
opes), sed Aesthetica, qua datum subiectum, certus cogitaturus, de dato obiecto, certa cogi-
tandi materia, plura pulcre cogitare possit (.Aesthetica, 115); Secunda cura sit in rebus ve-
nuste cogitandis Magnitudo, sed Aesthetica, quo nomine 1) pondus obiectorum et gravi-
tatem, 2) proportionatarum obiectis cogitationum, 3) cum foecunditate utrorumque, com-
plectamur {ibid., 177); Tertia cura sit in rebus eleganter cogitandis, Veritas, sed Aesthetica,
i. e. Veritas quatenus sensitive cognoscenda est {ibid, 423); Verioris in cogitando pulcritu-
dinis elegantiarumque studiosus quarto loco Lucem, claritatem, et perspieuitatem cogitato-
rum omnium sectetur, sed aestheticam, quae vel analogo rationis ad discrimina rei per-
spiciendae sufficiat {ibid., 614); Pulcritudinem cogitationum in primariis quintam numer-
amus, certitudinem sensitivam, analogo rationis etiam o b t i n e n d a m veritatis et
verisimilitudinis conscientiam et lucem, Persuasionem, sed Aestheticam {ibid., 829). The
Aesthetica has remained incomplete and the section vita cognitionis aesthetica was never
written.
52
Quintilian defines the argumentum in the generic sense as subject of discourse and in
the specific sense as ratio probationem praestans, qua colligitur aliud per aliud, et quae quod
est dubium per id quod dubium non est confirmt {Institutio oratoria, 5.X.U, The Loeb Clas-
sical library Cambridge, Massachusetts - London 1985, II, p. 208) and the topoi as sedes argu-
mentorum (ibid., p. 212). Baumgarten fuses the two definitions of argumentum. Wir haben
schon erklrt, was wir ein Argument nennen, nmlich eine Kenntnis, insofern sie zur Ver-
schnerung einer anderen Kenntnis etwas beitrgt (Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 142) and
translates them into the terms of gnoseologia inferiortransvaluating the concept of ratio from
argumentative nexus to connection between percetions: Perceptio quatenus est ratio, est
Argumentum. Sunt ergo argumenta locupletantia, nobilitantia, probanda, illustrantia, per-
suadentia, moventia, quorum aesthetica non solum poscit vim et efficaciam, sed etiam ele-
gantiam [. . .] Figurarum sententiae tot, quot argumentorum, sunt genera [. . .] Ergo et om-
nis ad cogitandum materies, ratio alterius perceptionis, perceptio ('Aesthetica, 26 and 540).
Baumgarten can thus arrange subjects and figures along a scale that corresponds to a new
topic: Erit itaque secundum hanc intensionis scalam argumentum et figuram pulcerrima,
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica 35

related questions: firstly the relations between logic and rhetoric and sec-
ondly those between rhetoric and aesthetics. Baumgarten shows an acute
awareness of the doctrinal status of rhetoric and of its connection both to
logic and aesthetics. He contests first the supremacy of rhetoric over logic
as claimed by Cicero and by contemporary as well as ancient sceptics. On
the other hand, Baumgarten claims, against modern dogmatics, that not on-
ly probable knowledge, which obtains in rhetoric, but also sensate cogni-
tion, which obtains in aesthetic knowledge, displays its specific truth. 56
Hence he rejects the Platonic conception of rhetoric as ars fallendi, that is as
an art of deceit: Aesthetica, quam minus inadaequate, ac Plato rhetoricen,
describas, nec, ut Plato, non artem, sed peritiam, verum et peritiam, et ar-
tem quandam gratiae ac voluptatis, non qualemcunque persuasionem fa-
bricator, sed, quae se deceat, bonam, et vere elegantem, nec est, quam Athe-
neus rhetoricen dick, ars fallendi.57 As we see, Baumgarten rejects the Pla-
tonic devaluation of rhetoric, which may also apply to aesthetics, and
moreover characteri2es aesthetic persuasion specifically as bona, namely free
of any reproachable aim and as vere elegans, namely endowed with its own
peculiar beauty.
Baumgarten's use of rhetorical concepts to explain the specific nature
of aesthetic knowledge as opposed to logical knowledge, led Croce to be-
lieve that Baumgarten assimilates aesthetics to rhetoric or, as he prefers to
term it, to oratory, as far as the central and essential point of Veritas aesthetica
is concerned. 58 This statement would be exact if 'assimilates' were under-
stood to mean the comparison Baumgarten makes between the logic of
rhetoric and the logic of aesthetics as opposed to logic in the narrow sense

complete cognoscatur ab analogo rationis, ut talis, id est completa cum certitudine et per-
suasione.
56
Ibid., 480: Non solum adversus Ciceronem et scepticos academicosque, vel veteres,
vel recentes, lubenter admitto dari rationi et intellectui puriori ac distinction per scientias as-
surgere nonnunquam ultra verisimilitudinem, non ad plenam quidem et omnibus numeris
absolutissimam, completam tarnen et earn, quae omnem oppositi formidinem excludat, veri
notitiam et perspicientiam: sed id etiam addo, quod pauci recentiorum dogmaticorum forte
concdant, inesse iam ipsis sensitivis et confusis animae perceptionibus nonnihil completae
tarnen certitudinis, et conscientiae vera quaedam ab omnibus falsis distinguendi sufficien-
tiam.
57
Ibid., 835.
58
B E N E D E T T O C R O C E , Rilegiendo cit., p. 12: Per siffatta pi o meno consapevole assi-
milazione con l'oratoria, la verit estetica si configura nel Baumgarten, come quella asser-
zione vera o falsa che sia, che il lettore di poesa, secondo le particolar condizioni di cultura
in cui si trova, secondo i luoghi, i tempi e le circostanze, accetta per vera; [. . .] importa che il
falso sia verisimile, o splendide mendax, e il vero non sia falsisimile, secondo la parola da lui con-
iata [. . .].
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica 35

Croce therefore points out that there is in Baumgarten a duplicity

of points of view: on the one hand he confirms the Leibnitian lex continui
between the various kinds of representation and on the other he intro-
duces two distinct fields of knowledge, aesthetic knowledge and logical
knowledge in the narrow sense. However the continuity between kinds
of representation does not prevent Baumgarten from establishing a clear-
cut dividing line between territcmum aestheticum and tertorium logicum. Con-
tinuity between objects of thought, namely between kinds of repre-
sentation, does not imply confusion between aesthetic and logical knowl-
edge.61 The difficulty arises if the Crocian distinction between the forms
of consciousness is presupposed valid, since it is certainly incompatible
with continuity between the various kinds of representation. Therefore
Croce does not discover a difficulty that actually exists in Baumgarten's
thought, but introduces one by postulating his dialettica dei distincti.62 From

aestheticae sunt, quae et quatenus analogo rationis, salva venustate, sensitivae repraesentari
possunt, vel manifesto, et explicite, vel cryptice in omissis enthymematum enunciationibus,
vel in exemplis, in quibus tanquam concretis, haec abstracta deprehendantur. The con-
nections, that Baumgarten establishes between objects and between the functions of the in-
ferior and superior faculties of knowledge in the field of aesthetic, provides the interpretative
principle for that genre of poetry whose contents is doctrinal or pratical-moral, generally
termed genus aestheticodogmaticum (Aesthetica cit., 567), which is divided into theoreticum and
practicum, the poetry of Lucretius is collocated in the first sub-genre: Lucretius est exemplum
cogitandi generis aestheticotheoretici (Aesthetica cit., 576). The relation that Croce estab-
lishes between aesthetic activity and the other activities of the spirit via the 'dialettica dei di-
stinti' (see note 62) does not provide such powerful! interpretative principles for Dante's po-
etry as may be seen from La Poesia di Dante, Laterza, Bari 19568 (1920) and from the sub-
sequent essays in 1M Poesia, Laterza, Bari 1936, cap. IV and in Conversazioni critiche. Serie terza,
Laterza, Bari 1932, cap. V, pp. 204-207.
61
See above note 22. See also Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 1: Wir mssen deutlich
denken, wir mssen schn denken, aber wir mssen die Grenzen zwischen beiden sehr wohl
unterscheiden and 569: Logisch und sthetisch denken ist der Form nach sehr un-
terschieden, ob es gleich der Materie nach oft einerlei sein kann. Der Dichter und der Philo-
soph knnen beide einen Satz auszufhren haben, z. B. das Lob Gottes aus seinen Vollkom-
menheiten erweisen. Die Materie ist einerlei, allein ein jeder wird sie auf eine andere Art aus-
fhren.
62
B. C R O C E , Rileggendo cit., p. 10-11: Che cosa sono queste tre classi di percezioni (le
oscure, le confuse e le distinte), ora, ai nostri occhi, per noi che le riconsideriamo e le ri-
pensiamo dopo pi di due secoli di nuove analisi e di nuove sistemazioni? Tre distinte forme
della coscienza, delle quali le percezioni 'oscure' corrispondono alla pratica passionalit o
sentimento che si dica, le 'confuse' ma 'chiare' alla pura conoscenza intuitiva ossia alla fanta-
sia, e le 'chiare' e insieme 'distinte' alia conoscenza intellettiva, critica e filosfica, ossia al
pensiero. Tre forme, tra le quali non c' passaggio gradale quantitativo: un sentimento, per
ricchezza, per intensit che acquisti, restera sempre sentimento e non diventer mai in-
tuizione; l'intuizione smilmente, per ampia che si faccia, non diventer mai concetto e giudi-
 35
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica

In fact only those general truths which can be demonstrated may be said to
be true in the narrow and proper sense. 65 Hence aesthetic truth must be
equated with verisimilitude, in other words, equated with that degree of
truth, which although not completely certain, includes nothing that may be
regarded as false. 6 6 Referring to the authority of Cicero and Aristotle, he
terms such knowledge et verisimik.61 We see that this is the first and
more general requirement (a potiori). But there are other important require-
ments for the verisimilitude of aesthetic knowledge which pertain to poe-
tische Erdichtungen. 68 First it is completely unmarked by inconsistency,

65
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 478: Man lernet sehr oft nicht
einmal, was wahr ist, und fordet es doch immer von anderen, ohne es selbst zu wissen. Wir
erkennen etwas als wahr, wann wir es demonstrieren knnen; dies Reich ist aber sehr enge
und erstreckt sich nur auf die allgemeinen Wahrheiten [. . .] Wir knnen also nicht allein
wahr nennen, was demonstriert ist; es sind noch mehr Dinge, die man nicht berzeugend er-
kennet, die aber der schne Geist demnach setzen mu. Hieraus flieet, da er wahrschein-
lich denken mu: das ist, da er Dingen setzen mu, darin ein gewisser Grad der Wahrheit
ist, welche aber doch nicht gewi wahr sind, sondern ohne merklichen Widerspruch wahr
scheinen. Croce does not take into due account the distinction between logical truth in the
narrow sense of the term, which pertains to demonstrative knowledge and probable truth,
which pertains to knowledge that cannot be demostrated but is nonetheless not contradic-
tory and therefore refers to possible things.
66
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica, 483: Est ergo Veritas aesthetica a potiori dicta veri-
similitude, ille veritatis gradus, qui etiamsi non evectus ad completam certitudinem, tamen
nihil contineat falsitatis observabilis.
67
Ibid., 484. For Aristode (Poetics 1451 b) the actions that the poet imitates must re-
spond to the criterion of verosimilitude () and therefore be possible (). However,
even the unlikely peripeteia of tragedy, that arouse surprise, do not offend the criterion of
poetic verisimilitude, since, according to Agathon's maxim it is likely that some events occur
unlikely {ibid. 1456 a). Even the impossible () under certain conditions, one of which
is the poet's skill, can contribute to the succs of the mimesis {ibid. 1460 b). The concept of
is taken up in the Rhetorics, where verisimilitude acts as a premiss for the arguments that
tend to persuasion and that are distinguished therefore from logical argumentations, which
move from necessary premises (ibid. 1355 b - 1357a).
68
See A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 484: Die Alten hieen die
schne Wahrheit , sowie die Sitten im Schnen . Sobald sich nun die Einbildungs-
kraft so ein Bild malet, von dem ich rede, und ich finde es nicht sogleich nach einem gewis-
sen Satz falsch, so rechne ich es unter das [. . .]. Es werden zwahr falsche Dinge mit un-
terlaufen, aber sie sind nur logisch und im weitlufigen Verstnde falsch, und sie sind wahr-
scheinlich, weil verschiedene Grnde und ein gehriger Zusammenhang bei ihnen zu finden
ist. At the end of Abteilung 31: Poetische Erdichtungen {ibid., 525) Baumgarten writes: Das,
was wir schn erdichten, ist nur ein kleiner Teil aus einem anderen Zusammenhange der
Dinge, und dieser kleiner Teil kann besser sein als ein kleiner Teil dieser Welt. Wir haben
hier sogar den Augustinus fr uns, der diese Erdichtungen nicht Lgen, sondern nur Figuren
der Wahrheit nennt. Nicht alles, was erdichtet ist, sagt er, ist eine Lge, sondern das nur, was
nicht bezeichnet; wann es aber etwas bezeichnet, so ist es eine Figur der Wahrheit [. . .] weil
Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten 's Aesthetica 27

In reviewing the set of conditions for aesthetic verisimilitude, one be-

comes aware that they increasingly lose logical features and acquire the au-
tonomous features that pertain to perfect sensate cognition, namely to be-
auty.
The logic of sensate cognition is expounded with the aid of rhetorical
concepts, but it is not identical or assimilated to these. Beauty is defined by
the concept of aesthetic perfection. The work of art, as we have seen, is
equated with a world where the greatest variety of features reign compatible
with their harmonious unity. The contents of a work of art are as far as pos-
sible individual and hence the artist must choose themes that are as far as
possible determinate and extensively clear: tandem sibi singularia legat the-
mata, in quibus regnet perfectio materialis.74 These themes will then be ex-
pressed with the specific characteristics required by perfectio cognitionis sensiti-
vae. Therefore everything that is in contrast to beautiful form, that does not
possess absolute elegance, light decorum, elegant perspicuity, fullness of
life, intrinsic persuasiveness, effectiveness in delighting and moving, is ex-
cluded from the work of art.75 This set of concepts that define the perfectio
materialis of the work of art, Baumgarten terms Studium veritatis absolutum, sed
aestheticum,76 It is precisely the search for a specifically aesthetic truth (ipsum
veritatis Studium aestheticum) that forces the artist to choose, for the sake of be-
auty, that which from a strictly logical point of view may even appear
false.77
The truth is specifically aesthetic insofar as it is known through sensate

gius imbiberint, modo nunc et inter meditationis tuae Seriem vel habeant, de iis, quae pro-
pinas, aut probabilitatem aestheticam, aut saltim in oppositum superponderantes rationes
non habeant animo satis praesentes, ut obscurent id omne, quod tuis superest elegantis veri-
similitudinis.
74
Ibid., 565.
75
Ibid.: Circumfundatur notarum ingenti multitudine. Reiecerit, quas non admittit pul-
cra forma. Restent, quarum vix unam desiderari brevis, sed eleganter plena, rotunditas, ve-
nusta dignitas, tum absoluta, veritatis ipsius materialis perfectio, elegans vividitas et necessa-
rius meditationi nitor, intima persuasio, vita praesertim et ad delectandum ac movendum ef-
ficacia patiatur. See also Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 22: Die Metaphysik hat uns schon
gelehrt, da die Kenntnis um so viel besser ist, je reicher, edler, richtiger, klarer, gewissen-
hafter und lebhafter sie ist. Diese 6 Kennzeichen geben ihr ihre Vorzge. Die sthetische
Kenntnis mu ebendieselben haben, sie mu reich, edel, wahr, voll Licht, gewi und lebhaft
sein.
76
Ibid., 566.
77
Ibid., 500: Ipsum veritatis Studium, quod esse potest, maximum mentiri non-
nunquam, i. e. latissime falsa, aut ea cogitare cogit, quae num logice strictissime sint omnino
vera, ipse nescit, aestheticum.

3
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica 35

the poet as of the orator, he is not referring to the appeal to the emo-
tions, but is underlining that aesthetic persuasion is not cosentia veritatis
distina and in this respect is akin to rhetorical persuasion.82 In fact

tangere, quae scilicet ad logices formulam exacta formae simul completam certitudinem in-
tellectui approbaret: ab huius tamen, formae scilicet legitimae, venustis occultationibus nunc
minus abstinere tuum est, quoniam tibi sufficere potest argument! scientifici satis evidentem
analogo rationis propinare verisimilitudinem. Ad hanc autem completa formae convictio non
requirituD> {ibid., 862). Thus the poet, even when, like Lucretius, uses philosophemes as his
subject, should avoid expounding them as a philosopher would, namely with formal argu-
ments; at the most the poet is allowed to use enthymemes, namely that type of imperfect syl-
logism, used by rhetoricians, so that the argumentation is elegantly concealed: cryptice in
omissis enthymematum enunciationibus (ibid., 443). Moreover conceptual knowledge in
general (cognitio symbolicd) is as such extraneous to poetry; Baumgarten therefore denies the
superiority of poetry over painting, which is based on the argument that language posseses
greater intensive clarity than the image. In fact only extensive clarity is poetic: Vocum et
orationis quanquam clariora phantasmata quam visibilium, hinc tamen praerogativam poe-
matis prae pictura affirmare non conamur, quoniam intensiva claritas cognitioni per voces
symbolicae concessa prae intuitiva nihil facit ad extensivam claritatem, quae sola potica
(Meditationes, 41). Meier uses the perhaps not very fortunate expressions of aesthetic con-
cept, aesthetic judgement and aesthetic syllogism in the first three chapters of the third vol-
ume of the Anfangsgrnde alter schnen Wissenschaften. Dritter Teil (C. H. Hemmerde, Halle im
Magdeburgischen 1750): p. 1, Von den aesthetischen Begriffen, p. 134, Von den aesthetischen Urthei-
len, p. 198, Von den aesthetischen Schlssen. However it is sufficient to read the introduction to
realize that Meier's treatement has the opposite aim to that which Croce attributes to him;
namely Meier does not wish to transfer the operations of cognitio distincta to cognitio confusa, on
the contrary he wishes to elaborate the distinction between aesthetic cognition and logical
cognition: Die Materien, welche ich in diesem Theile abgehandelt habe, werden noch den
Nutzen verschaffen knnen, da man, vermittelst derselben, den Unterschied zwischen der
philosophischen oder gelehrten und der aesthetischen Erkenntni, genauer einzusehen in
den Stand gesetzt werde. Wenn man die Vernunftlehre versteht, und dasjenige, was in de-
rselben unter andern von den philosophischen Begriffen, Urtheilen und Schlen gelehrt
wird, mit demjenigen vergleicht, was ich von den aesthetischen Begriffen, Urtheilen und
Schlen gesagt habe; so wird man den wichtigen Unterschied zwischen der gelehrten und
schnen Erkenntni handgreiflich gewahr werden (ibid., pp. 2-3). Croce himself shows, in
another context (Ini%ia%ione all'estetica del Settecento, in Storia dell'estetica per saggi cit., p. 137), the
awareness that Meier misunderstood his teacher even in essential points. But as regards the
question of aesthetic concepts, judgemets and syllogisms, it is valid what Gessner maintained
in general: Meier has simply watered down Baumgarten's wine.
82
Ibid., 856: Poetarum non minus est, ac oratorum, persuadere. Baumgarten is aware
that is possible to give persuasio in general a negative evalutation if, by playing on the ambi-
guity of its meaning, it is identified with the lenonia, which with precise reference to poetry
he calls affectata vividitas or fucus aestheticur. Persuasionem aliqui nunc logici dicunt erroneam
certitudinis opinionem, eum animi status, quo nos certos per errorem putamus. Ex qua vo-
cabulorum ambiguitate, sunt, qui sibi fenestram aperiunt, orationem ad persuadendum ido-
neam omnem lenociniis potius et fuco, quam veris accensendi venustatibus (Aesthetica cit.,
830). Persuasion in poetry is the function not of deceit but o lux aesthetica. Verioris in cogi-
 35
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica

Benedetto Croce still claims that Baumgarten holds a contradictory

position with regard to aesthetic truth and attempts to overcome this by
availing himself of 'oratoria'. In Croce's view oratory is a practical under-
taking, which does not have as its aim the discovery and affirmation of the
truth but has its end in persuasion and suggestion.88 By equating per-
suasion with the overwhelming or the submission of minds, Croce fully
misses the point of Baumgarten's theory of aesthetic truth and persuasion,
if my previous arguments are sound.89
The above observations have attempted to demonstrate that Baum-
garten has recourse to the language of rhetoric in order to clarify the
true nature of aesthetic knowledge as opposed to logical knowledge in
the narrow sense. Rhetorical language was the only well-established lan-
guage which the poetic tradition placed at his disposal. If one is preju-
diced against rhetoric it becomes difficult to understand that Baumgarten
uses rhetoric as a device for setting forth his revolutionary conception of
aesthetics as a logic of sensate cognition and of beauty as the perfection

88
B. C R O C E , Rileggendo cit., p. 11, cit. in note 6 3 . See Conversazioni Critiche. Serie ter^a, cit.,
p. 179: Il carattere pratico dell'oratoria dimostrato dal fatto che si differenziano gli oratori
in quanto viri boni dicendiperiti e in quanto uomini semplicemente rivolti a produrre l'effetto a
cui mirano, rispondente a un interesse, quale che esso sia: cio in oratori etici e oratori utili-
tari, etico-politici o meramente politici. Il che non ha da vedere con la loro eccellenza orato-
ria, perch nell'un tipo e nell'altro vi sono i capaci e gl'incapaci, gli abili e gl'inetti.
89
Baumgarten could repeat to Croce: Aesthetica [mea\, quam minus inadaequate, ac
Plato rhetoricen, describas [. . .] nec est, quam Atheneus \te consentiente ] rhetoricen dicit, ars
fallendi. Despite his unsympathetic evaluation of a central and decisive issue of Baum-
garten's aesthetics, namely the theory of aesthetic truth and persuasion, Croce's essay is
moving evidence of his love for the Aesthetica. Da pi decenni cercavo invano, in cataloghi e
presso librai antiquari, una copia della rarissima Aesthetica del Baumgarten, da me letta e stu-
diata a suo tempo per prestito ottenutone da una biblioteca tedesca, ma che avevo vaghezza
di possedere come primo libro recante il titolo di una scienza alla quale molta parte della mia
vita legata. E, quando non ci pensavo pi, o quando meno ci pensavo, or' qualche setti-
mana, uno dei librai, che tenevano in nota la mia richiesta, mi annunci di mettere a mia di-
sposizione [. . .] il libro giunse, l'esemplare era veramente bello, freschissimo, due volumetti
in dodicesimo [. . .] e io li rivoltai tra le mie mani e li contemplai con gioiosa soddisfazione
(Rileggendo cit., p. 1). Croce was probably the only person in Italy to possess a copy of the
Aesthetica until his friends dedicated a reprint, preceded by the Meditationes, to him for his sev-
entieth birthday, published by Laterza, Bari 1936. Croce had published, suis impensis, the first
modern edition: A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes Philosophicae de nonnullis ad poema per-
tinentibus, reprint of the only 1735 edition, edited by Benedetto Croce, Napoli 1900. The 1936
Laterza edition of the Meditationes, based on Croce's edition, was used by Heinz Paetzold in
the edition with the parallel German translation published by Felix Meiner Verlag, Hamburg
1983.
 35
'Truth and Persuasion in Baumgarten's Aesthetica

eral rhetoric may be defined as the science which treats generally of the
unperfected presentation of sensate representations, and general poetics
as the science which treats generally of the perfected presentation of sen-
sate representations.91 Later in the Aesthetica he is fully aware of the role
rhetoric plays in aesthetics on the condition that it is reformulated to
meet the needs of aesthetics. In fact he writes that aesthetica surgit al-
tius, suamque post se trahit rhetoricen, ultra questiones civiles in magis
sublimia.92 As we see, Baumgarten states with considerable clarity that
aesthetics occupies a higher position, one that is more noble in compari-
son with rhetoric, and autonomous. Moreover, aesthetics has its own
particular rhetoric, one that is not coterminous with traditional rhetoric.

91
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes cit., 117: Iam quum perfecte hoc fieri possit et im-
perfecte, hoc doceret Rhetorica Generalis scientia de imperfecte repraesentationes sensitivas pro-
ponendo in genere et illud Potica Generalis sentia de perfecte proponendo repraesentationes sensitivas in
genere.
92
Ibid., 8 3 6 . See also A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 5 : Die s-
thetik geht viel weiter als die Rhetorik und Poetik und ist also nicht mit ihr einerlei; ebenso-
wenig ist sie mit der Kritik einerlei.
44 Pie tro Pimpinella

Baumgarten distinguishes between persuausion, the aim of which is to

move and incite minds, and theoretical persuasion, for <<persuasio [. . .] ha-
bet tarnen et in theoreticis locumUndoubtedly aesthetic persuasion is theor-
etical, because aesthetic knowledge is a cognitio, or more precisely a cognitio
sensitiva, and not a practical undertaking.84 Although motion and excite-
ment are sometimes involved in aesthetic persuasion, they are rather a
consequence of aesthetic knowledge and not its aim, or inversely, as
Baumgarten precisely says, persuasion is the conditio antecedens of the vita
cognitionis and not the consequence.85 As we have seen, Baumgarten de-
fines aesthetic persuasion as veritatis et verisimilitudes conscientiam et lucem, a
definition which possesses a cognitive and not a practical connotation. 86
Moreover persuasio aesthetica is characterized as intima}1

tando pulcritudinis elegantiarumque studiosus quarto loco Lucem, claritatem, et perspicuita-

tem cogitatorum omnium sectetur, sed Aestheticam, quae vel analogo rationis ad discrimina
rei perspicienda sufficiat (Aesthetica cit., 614). The concept of lux aesthetica clarifies the use
Baumgarten makes of the rhetorical concept o persuasio in aesthetics with the purpose of dis-
tinguishing betwen genus cogitandipoeticum, which is simpliciter dilucidum etperspicuum (sensitive) or
nitidum et splendidum (Aesthetica cit., 625), and logical thought: Claritatis intensio per di-
stinctionem, adaequationem, profunditatem, intelligentiaeque veluti puritatem, prorsus non
est lux aesthetica, hinc nec absoluta nec comparativa, sed lgica. Hinc nec intenditur directo,
tanquam finis primarius, a pulcre cogitaturo (Aesthetica cit., 617).
83
Ibid., 829.
84
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 1: Da man auch Wissenschaften
von Begierden hat, so unterscheidet sich die sthetik dadurch von ihnen, da sie eine Wis-
senschaft einer gewissen Erkenntnis ist. Die Wissenschaften von Kenntnissen rechnet man
zur philosophia instrumentan oder organica, folglich gehret auch sie zur philosophia in-
strumentan, und die Logik und philosophia Instrumentalis werden nun nicht mehr als syn-
onima anzusehen sein. Diese sthetik unterscheidet sich von der Logik dadurch, da sie
sinnliche Kenntnis, die unteren Erkenntniskrfte zu ihrem Gegenstande hat. For Wolff the
affectus are repraesentationes confusae boni et mali. The representation of affects entails emotional
involvement, that contributes to the estensive clarity of the poetic representation: Idem et
hac ratione demonstra potest: quae repraesentantur, ut bona et mala, in iis plura nobis re-
praesentantur, quam si non ita repraesentarentur, ergo repraesentationes rerum, quae ut bo-
rne malaeve nobis confusae offeruntur, extensive clariores, quam si ita non proponenrentur,
hinc magis poeticae. Tales vero repraesentationes sunt motiones affectuum, ergo movere affec-
tus poeticum. (Meditationes cit., 26).
85
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 829: Haec [persuasio aesthetica] enim etiamsi
nonnunquam simul impulsionem ad agendum et incitationem involvat: habet tarnen et in
theoreticis locum, et singula probe perpensuris cum fructu distinguetur a vita cognitionis in
sequentibus animadvertenda, cuius est conditio antecedens persuasio, quae nonnunquam pro
consquente ponitur. Nonnunquam is justified if we think that for Baumgarten even a pare-
netical poem or an oration can attain peifectio cognitionis sensitivae (Aesthetica cit., 576).
86
Ibid., 829, cit. in note 80.
87
Ibid., 565, cit. in note 75.
44 Pie tro Pimpinella

cognition.78 This cognition possesses its specific complete certitude and, as

we shall see, persuasion.79 Baumgarten constructs his theory of aesthetic
certainty by degrees: aesthetic truth is a potion, namely primary from the log-
ical point of view, likely but, considered in its specific nature of sensate cog-
nition, it is completely certain. Thus it is understandable why Baumgarten
equates beauty of thought with sensate certitude, certitude which springs
from analogon rationis. To the extent that he defines aesthetic truth in this
way, Baumgarten considers this concept in itself and to be guided by a dif-
ferent logic from that of reason.
Sensate certitude reveals itself in the luminous consciousness of sen-
sate truth or verisimilitude, namely in aesthetic persuasion.80 As in the
case of probability Baumgarten distinguishes between logical persuasion
and aesthetic persuasion, namely between conviction, which is the dis-
tinct consciousness of truth and aesthetic persuasion, which is indistinct
and sensate.81 Thus when he says that persuasion is as much the task of

78
Ibid., 423: Tertia cura sit in rebus eleganter cogitandis, Veritas, sed Aesthetica, i. e.
Veritas, quatenus sensitive cognoscenda est.
79
Ibid., 481: Veritas quaedam, etiam aesthetica, tamen complete cognoscatur ab ana-
logo rationis, ut talis, id est completa cum certitudine et persuasione.
80
Ibid., 829: Pulcritudinem cogitationum in primariis [. . .] quintam numeramus, cer-
titudinem sensitivam, analogo rationis etiam obtinendam veritatis et verisimilitudinis consci-
entiam et lucem, Persuasionem, sed Aestheticam.
81
Ibid., 832: Conscientia veritatis distincta, convictio est, indistincta et sensitiva, per-
suasio. Croce does not take this distinction into account and maintains that the recourse to
rhetoric is responsible for the confusion between logical knowledge and aesthetic knowl-
edge: Da questa sostituzione dell'effetto oratorio alla verit potica provengono, tanto in lui
che nel Meier, non solo talune puerilit che si prendono con le molle e delle quali perci non
parlo, ma la teora assurda dei concetti, giudizi e sillogismi estetici (cio di quello che il pro-
prio operare dlia cognitio distincta in quanto distincta e che viene sventatamente trasferito nella
cognitio confusa) (B. C R O C E , Rileggendo cit., pp. 12-13). In fact Baumgarten always remains
faithful to the distinction between sensate representations and distinct concepts or repre-
sentations: Repraesentationes sensitivae [. . .] obscurae et clarae sunt repraesentationes poeticae,
Repraesentationes distinctae completae adaequatae profundae per omnes gradus non sunt sensiti-
vae, ergo nec poeticae. (Meditationes cit., 12, 14). Analogously iudicium sensuum, iudicium in-
tuitivum, that pertains to aesthetics are never confused with iudicium intellectuale, iudicium logicum,
that pertains to the sphere of logic. In the lessical filing being carried out at the LIE, the
term syllogismus recurs four times in the Aesthetica, in the 862 (twice), 875 and 877 and never
in syntagmatic connection with aestheticus. These paragraphs are all found in Sectio LI devoted
to Confirmatio, which is persuasio direta et ostensiva and is set against reprehensio, which is logical
refutation; confirmatio is therefore also called logicae refutations analogon (Aesthetica, 855).
Baumgarten distinguishes yet again between the operation of logic in the narrow sense of the
term and the operation of aesthetics, between ratio and analogon rationis and in this context he
specifically confirms the distinction between persuasio aesthetica and convictio lgica. Si con-
firmaturus eleganter tibi permiseris aliquando necessarian! aliquam etiam argumentationem
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

namely fiction can be heterocosmic but not Utopian: Fictions in which

there is much that is mutually inconsistent are Utopian, not heterocosmic;
hence there is nothing self-contradictory in poetic fiction. 69 Secondly aes-
thetic cognition must be unequivocal and completely certain only however
as regards its sensate nature. 70 Thirdly, it has to be probable from the logical
and aesthetic points of view. 'Probable' in general means that it has more
elements for being accepted than for being rejected. Baumgarten distin-
guishes logical probability from aesthetic probability, the grounds for the
former are found in distinct cognition, while the grounds for the latter are
found in sensate cognition.71 Moreover aesthetic verisimilitude obtains even
in representations which from a logical point of view are doubtful or im-
probable, on the condition that they are aesthetically probable. 72 As the last
condition, Baumgarten states that however low the degree of probability
may be, it can be accepted if it is endowed with elegance.73

es dieselbe in ein viel schneres Licht setzt. In the corresponding 525 of the Aesthetica,
Baumgarten quotes in full Augustine's passage from the Quaestionum Evangeliorum libri duo (II,
51). Croce reports Augustine's words and notes that Baumgarten se ne era rimasto colpito,
non per questo le aveva bene intese (si vedano le spiegazioni che inframmette nel paragrafo e
nel luogo corrispondente delle Vorlesungen) (. C R O C E , Rileggendo cit., p. 13). An unfore-
warned reader would not find any hint of misunderstandings in Baumgarten's explanations,
also perhaps because Croce's elusive indication is not very helpful. Croce is very struck by
the objections Baumgarten raises as regards poetical fictions, like the one replied to with the
quotation from Augustine: has certe fictiones concedes esse mendacia: cur itaque dfinis, il-
lustras, distingus et analgica saltern commendare videris? Croce {ibid., p. 12) attributes
them to a critical awareness, that Baumgarten tries in vain to silence. In fact these obiections
do not pose insurmountable problems, at least for the expert of aesthetics: Der groe Hau-
fen wird das, was wir bisher von den Erdichtungen gesagt haben, Lgen nennen; allein der
Vernnftige, der die Regel kennet, wird es nicht zugeben (Kollegium ber die sthetik cit.,
525).
m
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes cit., 57: Figmenta in quibus plura sibi invicem re-
pugnant sunt utpica, non heterocosmica; hinc in figmentis poeticis nil sibi invicem rpugnt.
70
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 4 8 5 : Erunt itaque aesthetice vera, id est, veri-
similia, 1) sensitive et intellectualiter complete certa, qua sunt prius, 2) sensitive tantum com-
plete certa, in quibus adhuc intellectus suam non exercuit operam, 3) logice et aesthetice pro-
babilia, qua sunt posterius.
71
Ibid.. Probabilia quoniam sunt, quibus ad dandum assensum plus rationis est, quam
ad denegandum; et Improbabilia, quibus ad denegandum assensum plus rationis est, quam ad
dandum: quando rationes dubitandi et decidendi, pro assensu et contra eundem distincte
cognoscuntur, oritur Probabilitas Lgica, si sensitive, Aesthetica. A potiori desumitur de-
nominatio, quoties est quaedam probabilitas aestheticologica.
72
Ibid., 486: Verisimilia aesthetica erunt 4) logice forte dubia, immo improbabilia,
modo sint aesthetice probabilia.
73
Ibid.. 5) aesthetice etiam dubia et improbabilia, non aliis solum, quam quibus potissi-
mum venuste cogites, sed etiam his ipsis forsan alias, quando rationes contra assensum lar-
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

this presumed difficulty he then deduces Baumgarten's recourse to rheto-

ric and judges it to be an expedient.63
In fact Baumgarten uses rhetorical concepts to solve the problem of
the distinction between logical knowledge in the narrow sense and aesthetic
knowledge. Both these kinds of knowledge as such aim at truth. There then
arises the problem of defining aesthetic truth as opposed to logical truth
and of removing the apparent contradiction contained in the concept o f f i g -
menta vera. Baumgarten does not solve the problem by replacing poetic truth
with oratory effect, but by reformulating the rhetorical concepts of veri-
similitude, probability, certainty and persuasion for aesthetic purposes. This
reformulation is justified insofar as the aesthetic notion of truth is closer to
the rhetorical than to the logical notion of truth in the narrow sense. How-
ever aesthetic concepts are not the same as rhetorical concepts and their
particular nature must be specified.
To avoid misunderstanding, it must be borne in mind that Baumgarten
treats aesthetic truth from two points of view. Firstly he contrasts it with
logical truth in the narrow sense and then he considers aesthetic truth itself.
As regards the first aspect he writes that aesthetic truth does not have the
complete certainty of logical truth, but only verisimilitude, which he defines
as follows: Talia autem, de quibus non complete quidem certi sumus,
neque tamen falsitatem aliquam in iisdem appercipimus, sunt Verisimilia.64

zio e sempre restera fantasma potico. Il passaggio dall'una all'altra non quantitativo ma
per implicazione o per dialettica, non per aumento ma per crisi, non evoluzionistico ma (per
adoperare, se cosi piace, una parola dlia biologa) epigenetico.
63
Ibid., p. 11-12: L'espediente, al quale ricorre per trovare qualche pace, gli fornito
(come a me pare indubitabile, sebbene egli non lo dica espresso o non ne sia ben con-
sapevole) dall'oratoria, che essendo operazione pratica, non ha per fine la ricerca e afferma-
zione del vero ma la persuasione o suggestione degli animi, e in questa capacita d'efficacia ri-
pone la sua perfectio e il suo criterio discriminativo, onde fugge il vero che non sia persuasivo
e ammette il non vero che sia tale. On the contrary, as we shall see, Baumgarten expressly
says that aesthetic is not to be identified with rhetoric and he is well aware of using rhetoric
for the purposes of aesthetics. Moreover, the concept of perfectio cannot be considered simi-
lar to rhetorical effectiveness; it has, as has been shown, a logical and metaphysical status.
Baumgarten uses not only the concept of persuasio aesthetica, but also all six of the afore-
mentioned classes of argumenta to explain and expound the concept of perfectio for the pur-
poses of aestethics. Finally, truth that is not persuasive does not exist for Baumgarten, since,
as we shall see, also for logical truths there exists a conscientia veritatis distincta, which he calls
convictio, to differentiate it from the consentia indistincta et sensitiva, which is proper to persuasio
aesthetica. (Aesthetica cit., 832). The non-truth that is persuasive exists for Baumgarten even
less, unless, as he expressly states (see below note 82), the lux aesthetica is confused with the
lenocinia of the affectata vividitas.
M
Aesthetica cit., 483.
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

and if it did not have an evaluative nature. In actual fact Croce means by
'assimilation' the substitution of the oratory effect for poetic truth and
this interpretation entails an explicit devaluation of rhetoric.59 But Croce's
interpretation, as we shall attempt to show, is not justified by the text of the
Aesthetica.
The substitution of oratory effect for poetic truth, is, in Croce's opin-
ion, the consequence of a difficulty from which Baumgarten could not ex-
tricate himself, in other words, the impossibility of reconciling two contra-
sting theories: on the one hand continuity between the various kinds of rep-
resentation (obscure, clear, confused and distinct) and on the other the
distinction between territonum aestheticum and territorium logicum.M

59
Ibid.: Ma questa assimilazione dlia verit estetica alla verit o piuttosto alla non veri-
t oratoria offende, in pari tempo, la coscienza della poesa, che sa che l'incanto dlia be-
llezza non l'inganno nel quale cade la credulit, e la coscienza morale, che non pu ricevere
nella cerchia del vero la falsit, n consentire alla pi piccola indulgenza verso di questa.
60
Ibid., p. 11: Siffatta concezione del rapporto tra le varie forme della percezione o della
coscienza, e l'altra concezione dell'Estetica come scienza indipendente e del conoscere poti-
co come anteriore a quello logico e avente la propria perfectio nella pulcritudo, erano sostan-
zialmente contrastant! tra loro; e, di necessit, o la prima avrebbe dovuto dimostrare fallace e
dissolvere l'altra, e soffocare in culla la neonata scienza dell'Estetica, o questa avrebbe dovu-
to, rioperando, correggere profondamente e trasformare il concetto della coscienza, delle sue
forme e del suo modo di operare. In fact links between the lower and the higher part of the
cognitive faculty hold in Baumgarten's aesthetics for several good reasons. Firsdy sensitive
cognition is a step towards distinct cognition: Obi. 5) confusio mater erroris. Resp. a) sed
conditio, sine qua non, inveniendae veritatis, ubi natura non facit saltum ex obscuritate in
distinctionem. Ex nocte per auroram meridies (Aesthetica cit., 7). Secondly understanding
and reason play an important though secondary role in aesthetic knowledge: Ad ingenium
venustum, A) facilitates cognoscitivae inferiores, earumque dispositiones naturales; ) facili-
tates cognoscitivae superiores, quatenus a) intellectus et ratio per Imperium animae in semet
ipsam multum non raro conferunt, ad excitandas facultates inferiores, b) consensus harum et
apta pulcritudini proportio saepe non nisi per intellectus et rationis usum obtinetur, c) ma-
gnae vividitatis in analogo rationis consectarium spiritui naturale Pulcritudo intellectus et Ra-
tionis, perspicientiae nexus extensive distinctae {Aesthetica cit., 30-38). Finally, the object of
pulchre cogitare is not only what is clear and confused, but also what is distinct, although the
latter must be 'hidden' in beatifull representations, which in themselves are not distinct: Wir
nennen zwar die sthetik eine Wissenschaft von der sinnlichen Erkenntnis; allein nicht de-
shalb, als wenn alles sinnlich und gar nichts deutlich darinnen wre, nein, sondern weil die
Hauptbegriffe sinnlich bleiben, so wie man das einen deutlich und scientifischen Vortrag
nennt, wo die Hauptbegriffe deutlich sind. In dem sinnlichen Vortrage sind die deutlichen
Begriffe versteckt. Die Schnheit wird hier nicht in die Verwirrung gesetzet, sondern es wird
gezeigt, wie verworrene Vorstellungen schn werden sollen (Kollegium ber die sthetik cit.,
17). See also Aesthetica, 123: Horizonti aesthetico logicoque possunt esse multae materiae
commune, hic ideo, quia aliquid in scientiis pertractatur, non excluditur idem ex sphaera pul-
critudinis omnino, sed quatenus punctim et minutim cum accuratione philosophica mathe-
maticaque conciperetur and 443: Veritatum aestheticologicaram generalium eae tantum
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

The six classes of argumenta constitute a specifically aesthetic topic, that

leads the obsolete lists of commonplaces (loci) and figures (forms of expres-
sion) back to the original values of a knowledge attentive to the richness
and importance of the subject, to the clarity and veracity of the exposition
and to the emotional tension that favours its expression.53 The task of or-
dering the variety of contents within unity is fulfilled by the artist chiefly in-
sofar as he succeeds in attaining truth for his representations.54 The truth of
a work of art involves certitude and persuasion.55
In order to clarify this issue, one has to investigate two different but

quae cognitionem et locupletiorem, et graviorem et veriorem et certiorem et ardentiorem, e.

g. thematis primarii, simul efficiant (ibid., 142). The new topic is also conceived as facul-
tatum animai sensitivarum catalogum Aliam addamus formulam topicorum aestheticorum. Q u o
plures, quo perfectiores facilitates animae inferiores, quo plura, quo maiora, quo magis co-
haerentia, sub intellectus et rationis imperio, poterunt conferre ad pulcre cogitandum thema
datum, hoc erit illud pulcrae meditationi aptius (ibid., 140).
53
Baumgarten judges the traditional topics as being poor: Man hat in den ehemaligen
Zeiten sehr viel aus dieser Lehre [die Topik] gemacht und sie als das einzige Mittel Argu-
mente zu erfinden und von Sachen zu reden betrachtet. Wir haben in unseren Tagen andere
Hilfsmittel, und wann wir viel gelernt haben, so knnen wir viel von den Dingen denken,
ohne allen elenden Topiken folgen und alle Fcher durchlaufen drften (Kollegium ber die
sthetik cit., 130). The loci universales are of little or no use in aesthetics, at the most they
may be usefull for the preliminary exercises (palana), since poetic matter must possess the
qualities proper to sensate cognition, namely concreteness and individuality: [. . .] ex catho-
licis locis, quae quadrent rebus omnibus, vix ac ne vix sperari posse [. . .] minus curabit ho-
rum topicorum subsidio hylen corradere, parum aut nihil ad venuste cogitandum profutu-
ram (Aesthetica cit., 138). Greater consideration is given to the loa particulares that concern
themata singularia (ibid., 139).
54
All the knowledege, that Baumgarten comprehensively calls aestheticologica, mirrors
metaphysical truth and is subiectiva in contrast to the obiectiva truth of metaphysics ( Veritas
metaphysica, realis, obiectiva, materialis). Metaphysical truth is the conformity of objects to uni-
versal principles, namely to the principle of contradiction and the principle of reason: Veri-
tatem obiectorum metaphysicorum novimus convenientiam eorundem cum universalibus
maxime principiis et inde Leibnitium intelligimus, qui Theodiceae II. p. m. 312: Potest, in-
quit, did aliqua ratione principium contradictionis et rationis sufficientis inclusum definitioni ven et falsi
QAesthetica, 423). Both logical truth and aesthetic truth must be governed by the two pri-
mary principles, if they are to mirror metaphysical truth. In fact contradiction is excluded not
only from rational knowledge but also from aesthetic knowledge; as we have seen, Utopian
representations are banned from poetry. As regards the principle of reason, this operates in
logic and aesthetics in different ways. Aesthetics is the logic of the analogon rationis, which
grasps the nexus between sensate representations, while logic in the narrow sense is the logic
of reason, which is the faculty of stating nexus between general judgements: Veritas aesthe-
tica requirit obiectorum pulcre cogitandorum, II. nexum cum rationibus et rationatis, quate-
nus ille sensitive cognoscendus est, per analogon rationis (Aesthetica, 437). Therefore
Baumgarten also calls aesthetics ars analog) rationis.
55
A. G. BAUMGARTEN, Aesthetica cit., 481: Veritas quaedam, etiam aesthetica, tamen
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

problem is found in the traditional rhetorical conception of truth. In this

precise sense, truth is not the rigorous formal deduction of an assertion or a
set of assertions, but that verisimilitude, which relies on the orator's skill to
make a discourse evident or at least credible. Thus it may be said: just as rea-
son is capable of strict logical demonstration, so the analogue of reason (pul'-
crut rationis analogori) is capable of attaining aesthetic truth by means, which
are in a peculiar way similar to those of the orator.49
To develop this main thesis Baumgarten makes use of the categories
of classical rhetoric. In order to grasp the specific role that rhetoric plays in
Baumgarten's theory of art, one has to bear in mind that he bases the struc-
ture of his aesthetica artificialis docens on the rhetorical doctrine of inventio. As I
have intimated, the 'aesthetica artificialis docens' in fact corresponds to the
'lgica artificialis docens'. Baumgarten thus first models his aesthetics on
logic and then structures the main theoretical part of his aesthetics in ac-
cordance with the most important part of the art of rhetoric, namely in-
vention. Rhetoric plays a subordinate but very important role in Baum-
garten's Aesthetica.^ Rhetoric performs for Baumgarten the crucial role of

[. . .] L'eccellente Baumgarten, uomo pieno di calore e di convinzione, spesso cos schietto e

vivace nel suo latino scolastico, una simpatica e ragguardevole figura nella storia de-
U'Estetica, ma sempre della scienza in formazione, non dlia formata, dell'Estetica condenda,
non della condita (ibid., p. 240-241). The essays, reprinted in Storia dell'estetica per saggi and
thence also Rileggendo, had the aim of giving una nuova e pi positiva e pi varia esposizione
della storia della disciplina compared to that one troppo polmica e negativa in the Esttica
(see Avverten^).
49
Croce criticizes Baumgarten's undertaking for being contradictory: Ci si vede nel
Baumgarten, che fa replicad e vani sforzi (particolarmente nelle sezioni della sua opera in-
torno alia Veritas aesthetica e alia verisimilitude) per asserire una forma di verit che dovrebbe
essere insieme conforme alla esigenza peculiare della concezione monistico-astratta o gra-
dale quantitativa - la medesima di quella lgica, quantunque imperfetta, e conforme alla
esigenza peculiare della scienza dell'Estetica - perfetta di propria perfezione e bella di quella
luce che si chiama la bellezza (Rileggendo cit., p. 11). But, as we have seen, Baumgarten dis-
tinguishes two areas of knowledge, each of which possesses its own logic, the lgica facultatis
cognosativae inferioris and the logic of the superior faculties (intellect and reason) and its own
perfection, the perfectio materialis of aesthetic cognition and the perfectio formalis of rational cog-
nition respectively.
50
Leibniz-Wolffian gnoseology plays a major role. A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Sciagraphia ency-
clopediaephilosophicae, hrsg. von J. Frster, Halle 1769, 25: Gnoseologia (die Wissenschaft zu
denken, die Logik in weiterer Bedeutung), (Lgica significatu latiori) est scientia cognitionis
tarn cogitandae quam proponendae, philosophiae organicae pars potior. [. . .] Quia omnis
cognitio vel sensitiva vel intellectualis, erit scientia cognitionis I) sensitivae, II) intellectualis.
Prior est Aesthetica (die Aesthetik, die philosophische Theorie der schnen Wissenschaf-
ten).
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

of the soul.42 Enthusiasm, guided by inner sense and intimate consciousness

(sensus internus, coscientia intima), largely contributes to raising obscure repre-
sentations into the light of knowledge.43 An important function of enthusi-
asm is to fire the imagination. The artist must have recourse to fictions in or-
der to unveil many of the infinite attributes of individuals, which are not re-
traceable through experience: If experience does not suffice, true fictions
are available; if, indeed, the historical part is not rich enough, heterocosmic
fictions are likely to be necessary. Therefore, fictions, both true and hetero-
cosmic are, on condition, necessary in a poem.44 The objects of fiction that
are not in contradiction to the real world, Baumgarten calls true, those that
are possible in a world that is different from the real world, he calls hetero-
cosmic, and those that are impossible in every possible world he calls Uto-
pian.45 Therefore heterocosmic means that the object of fiction may exist
only in a possible world other than this real one.46 The set of poetic fictions

42
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Metaphysica cit., 511: Sunt in anima percetiones obscurae. Ha-
rum complexus Fundus animae dicitur.
43
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 8 0 : Psychologis patet in tali mpetu totam qui-
dem animam vires suas intendere, maxime tamen facultates inferiores, ita, ut omnis quasi
fundus animae surgat nonnihil altius, et maius aliquid spiret, pronusque suppeditet, quorum
obliti, quae non esperti, quae praevidere non posse nobis ipsis, multo magis aliis, videba-
mur.
44
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes cit., 58: [. . .] experientia non sufficiente figmenta
vera, nec historia quidem satis divite, figmenta probabiliter heterocosmica necessaria. Ergo
figmenta tam vera quam heterocosmica in poemate hypothetice necessaria. See also Aesthetica, 482:
Experientia stricte dicta multis reliquarum animae facultatum inferiorum perceptionibus
praeter sensationes aliis est interstinguenda, si pulcrius aliquid excogitare sit animus.
45
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes cit., 51: Repraesentationum talium obiecta vet in mundo
existentepossibilia vel impossibilia. Has Figmenta, illas liceat dicere Figmenta vera and 52: Fig-
mentorum obiecta vel in existente tantum, vel in omnibus mundis possibilibus impossibilia, haec quae
Utpica dicemus absolute impossibilia, ilia salutabimus Heterocosmica. Ergo utopicorum nulla,
hinc nec confusa nec potica datur repraesentatio.
46
An analogous problem already arises in the wolffian theory of art, which is quite rudi-
mentary in comparison with Baumgarten's. In his theory of imagination, which had a great
influence not only on Baumgarten but also on major art theorists during the mid-eighteenth
century (Bodmer, Breitinger, Gottsched), Wolff considers the products of facultas ftngendi as
leere Einbildungen which are not possible (nicht mglich) and commends only those products of
the imagination guided by reason, and therefore containing truth. (For a detailed analysis of
this issue see P. P I M P I N E L L A , Imaginatio, Phantasia e Facultas fingendi in Chr. Wolff e A. G. Baum-
garten, in Phantasia Imaginatio, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of the Lessico
Intellettuale Europeo, edited by M. Fattori and M. L. Bianchi, Edizioni dell'Ateneo, Roma
1988, p. 379-414). Wolff revalues the products of arsfingendi in his theory of novel, which re-
gards fictions as the tale of something which can take place in another world: Und solcher
Gestalt habe ich jede dergleichen Geschichte nicht anders anzusehen als eine Erzehlung von
etwas, so in einer andern Welt sich zutragen kann (Deutsche Metaphysik, 571). Baumgarten's
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

Metaphysical reality in its determination is then better attained through aes-

thetic knowledge than by logical means. Metaphysical reality is, according to
Leibniz, the reality of individuals, since only monads are real in a strictly
metaphysical sense. In fact, aesthetic knowledge is according to Baumgarten
the knowledge of individuals: Individuals are determined in every respect.
Therefore particular representations are in the highest degree poetic.36 The
problem now arises: how is material perfection to be attained through par-
ticular representations. This problem has both a logical and a rhetorical as-
pect, which are intertwined. The logical aspect of Baumgarten's aesthetics
as a logic of the lower part of the cognitive faculty relies on the distinction
between intensively clearer and extensively clearer representations (repraesen-
tationes intensive clariores and repraesentationes extensive clariores).v The distinction
between the two sorts of clear representations is Baumgarten's contribution
to the logic of ideas, which was elaborated by Leibniz, on Cartesian
grounds, and taken up by Wolff. Two degrees of clarity are defined in this
distinction, intensive clarity, due to the greater clarity of the characteristic
traits of a representation (claritas intensive maior) and extensive clarity due to
the greater number of characteristic traits of a representation (claritas exten-
sive maior). The function of clear representations is to permit the recognition
or individuation of a thing. In this function extensively clear representations
play the preeminent role, since the clarity of a representation increases in
proportion to the number of characteristic traits. The greater the number of
characteristic traits, the greater its degree of clarity.38
The characteristic traits of an extensively clear representation may be
defined, in Meier's words, as unmittelbare Merkmale (notae immediatae,
proximae) to distinguish them from mittelbare Merkmale (notae mediatae, re-
mota) that characterize distinct notions.39 The relation between immediate

36
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes cit., 19: Individua sunt omnimode determinata,
ergo repraesentationes singulares sunt admodum poeticae>>.
37
Ibid., 16: Si in repraesentatione A plura repraesententur quam in C D etc., sint ta-
rnen omnes confusae, A erit reliquis Extensive Clarior.
38
A. G. BAUMGARTEN, Metaphysica cit., 531: Ergo multitudine notarum augetur clari-
tas. Claritas claritate notarum maior, Intensive (a), multitudine notarum, Extensive Maior (b)
dici potest. Clear representations remain below the limit of distinction (infra distinctionem)
and thus are said to be confused or indistinct: Quum clarae repraesentationes sint poeticae, aut
erunt distinctae aut confusae, iam distinctae non sunt, ergo confusae (.Meditationes cit., 15).
39
G. F. MEIER, Auszug aus der Vernuftlehre, Halle 1752, in Kant's gesammelte Schriften, hrsg.
von der Kniglich Preuischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Bd. XVI: Kant's handschriftlich-
er Nachla; Bd. III: Logik, Berlin-Leipzig 1924. See N. H I N S K E , Kant-Index, Band I: Stellenindex
und Konkordanz George Friedrich Meier Auszug aus der Vernunftlehre, Fromman-Holzboog,
Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1986.
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

mately confused, that is indistinct.26 Leibniz was aware that perfect logical
knowledge is seldom attained by men and it is by no means attainable when
an individual thing is the cognitive object, because the individual includes
an infinity of attributes and therefore the concept is not completely ana-
lyzable. A paradox still arises in Leibnitian thought: individuals, that consti-
tute the actual metaphysical reality, are unknowable: Car (quelque paradoxe
que cela paroisse) il est impossible nous d'avoir la connaissance des in-
dividus et de trouver le moyen de determiner exactement l'individualit
d'autre chause, a moins de la garder elle meme.27 The knowledge of an in-
dividual object implies the knowledge of its principle of individualization,
which allows one to deduce all the attributes of its complete notion. 28 But
this is impossible, at least for man, because knowing a priori an individual
notion would imply knowing the whole universe, since individuals are mir-
rors of the universe.29
Leibniz still admits that perfect knowledge, which is sometimes attain-
able in mathematics, is abstract and therefore incomplete. Baumgarten ad-
mits this, but also claims that aesthetic knowledge is capable of perfection
and, like the knowledge of an individual, is concrete and in a special way al-
so complete. Both the rational or logical in the narrow sense and the sen-
sate or aesthetic knowledge have as their aim the objective metaphysical re-
ality or truth.30 Rational and sensate knowledge, insofar as they mirror meta-

26
See the interpretation of the American editors of the Meditationes. When it is said
that poetry is confused, it is meant that its representations are fused together and not sharply
discriminated. (The reader of the Reflections must be careful to keep fusion foremost here and
not confusion in the derogatory sense) (Reflections cit., Introduction, p. 21). This interpretation,
quoted with approval in the contemporary literature, is suggestive but imprecise from the
logical point of view. See below my approch to the concept of extensive clarior.
21
G . W . L E I B N I Z , Nouveaux Essais sur l'entendement humain, in Die philosophischen Schriften,
hrsg. von C. I. Gerhardt, G. Olms, Hildesheim, Bd. 5, p. 268.
28
G. W. L E I B N I Z , Discours de metapbysique, in Die philosophischen Schriften, hrsg. von C. J.
Gerhardt, G. Olms Verlag, Hidesheim-New York 1978, Bd. 4, p. 433: Ainsi il faut que le
terme du sujet enferme toujours celuy du prdicat, en sorte que celuy qui entendroit parfaite-
ment la notion du sujet, jugerait aussi que le prdicat luy appertient. Cela estant, nous pou-
vons dire que la nature d'une substance individuelle ou d'un estre complet, est d'avoir une
notion si accomplie qu'elle soit suffisante comprendre et faire deduire tous les prdicats
du sujet qui cette notion est attribue.
29
Ibid., p. 434: On peut mme dire que toute substance porte en quelque faon le ca-
ractre de la sagesse infinie et de la toute-puissance de Dieu, et l'imite autant qu'elle en est
susceptible. Car elle esprime qoyque confusement tout ce qui arrive dans l'univers, pass,
present ou avenir, ce qui a quelque ressemblance une perception ou connoissance infinie
[. . .].
30
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Metaphysica cit., 8 9 : Veritas metaphysica (realis, obiectiva, ma-
terialis), est ordo plurium in uno.
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

ture of such cognition. The question now arises: what does Baumgarten
mean when he states that sensate cognition must attain its perfection in or-
der to create beauty? As we have seen, Baumgarten's definition of beauty
implies the perfection of sensate cognition (perfectio cognitionis sensitivae, Voll-
kommenheit der sinnlichen Erkenntnis).12 The concept of perfection is defined
by Baumgarten according to Leibniz and to Wolff as unity or consensus in
variety (Einigkeit in der Vielheit, consensus in vanetate)P Baumgarten borrows

22
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Kollegium ber die sthetik cit., 14 - 16: Alles was schn ist,
gehret in ihr [der sthetik] Feld, sobald es aber deutlich wird, gehret nicht hierher. Sobald
ich in der sinnlichen Erkenntnis Vollkommenheiten finde, die deutlich werden, so be-
kmmere ich mich nicht mehr als ein stheticus darum [. . .] Die Vollkommenheiten oder
Unvollkommenheiten der sinnlichen Kenntnis gehen den sthetiker nur insofern an, in-
sofern er sie als schn oder als hlich erkennet.
23
A. G . B A U M G A R T E N , Metaphysica cit., 9 4 : Si plura simul sumpta unius rationem suf-
ficientem constituunt, consentiunt, consensus ipse est perfectio, et unum in quod con-
sentitur, ratio perfectionis determinans (focus perfectionis). See G . W . L E I B N I Z , Initia et Spe-
cimina Scientiae novae Generalis, in Die philosophischen Schriften, Bd. VII, p. 87: Nun die einigkeit
in der Vielheit ist nichts anders als die bereinstimmung, und weil eines zu diesem nher
stimmet als zu jenem, so flieet daraus die Ordnung, von welcher alle Schnheit herkommt,
und die Schnheit erwecket liebe. See C H R . W O L F F , Philosophiaprima sive Ontologia, in Gesam-
melte Werke, II. Abt. Lateinische Schriften, Bd. 3, hrsg. J. ECOLE, Olms, Hildesheim-New
York 1977, 503: Perfectio est consensus in varietate, seu plurium a se invicem differ-
entium in uno. Consensum vero appello tendentiam ad idem aliquod obtinendum. As is
known, Kant criticized the use of the concept of perfection in order to define beauty and
judgement of taste: Das Geschmacksurteil ist von dem Begriffe der Vollkommenheit gn-
zlich unterschieden. Die objective Zweckmigkeit kann nur vermittelst der Beziehung des
Mannigfaltigen auf einen bestimmten Zweck, also nur durch einen Begriff, erkannt werden.
Hieraus allein schon erhellt, da das Schne, dessen Beurteilung eine blo formale Zweck-
mssigkeit ohne Zweck, zum Grunde hat, von der Vorstellung des Guten ganz unabhngig
sei, weil das letztere eine objective Zweckmigkeit, d. i. die Beziehung des Gegenstandes
auf einen bestimmten Zweck, voraussetzt (Kritik der Urtheilsknrft, Akademie Textausgabe, V,
Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 1968, p. 226). Kant's objection applies only to Wolffs conception
of perfection. In fact Wolff identifies the principle of perfection (Grund der Vollkommenheit)
with a specific aim, as may be seen from his definition quoted above and from the following
example: Die Zusammenstimmung des Mannigfaltigen machet die Vollkommenheit der
Dinge aus. Z. E. die Vollkommenheit einer Uhr beurtheilet man daraus, da sie die Stunden
und ihre Theile richtig zeiget. Also ist der Grund von der Vollkommenheit der Uhr, die rich-
tige Anzeige der Zeit [Deutsche Metaphysik, 1 5 2 - 1 5 3 ) . Asking for the principle of perfection
equals to asking quinam sint corporum usus et fines et quinam sint partium singularum usus
et fines (Cosmologa, 539). On the contrary Baumgarten, although he makes use of Wolffs
formule consensus in varietate, he identifies the focus perfectionis with unity (unum) and not with
aim. Therefore, as regards the concept of perfection, Baumgarten is mainly indebted to Leib-
niz. Baumgarten's definition of perfection is rather akin with Kant's subjective Zweckmigkeit
der Vorstellungen. Das Formale in der Vorstellung eines Dinges, d. i. die Zusammenstimmung
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

Hence there is a strict symmetry between the two disciplines: just as

logic, which includes both analytica and dialctica, is the ars rationis, so aesthet-
ics, the theory of the liberal arts, is ars analogi rationis. Both are arts insofar as
they give rules to the knowledge that lies in human nature, namely to nat-
ural logic and natural aesthetics respectively. Both are sciences, or philo-
sophical disciplines insofar as they are able to prove their principles a priori.
These principles are deduced from psychology, which according to Wolff
supplies principles both for sensate and for intellectual cognition. Thus
Baumgarten can state: Since psychology affords sound principles, we have
no doubt that there could be available a science which might direct the low-
er cognitive faculty in knowing things sensately.14
In his Psjchologia Emprica Wolff divides the lower part of the cognitive
faculty, which deals with obscure, clear and confused representations from
the higher part, which deals with distinct representations possibly becoming
complete and adequate.15 The Wolffian theory of the cognitive faculty can
be regarded as a psychological reshaping of the logical classification of ideas
to be found in Leibniz.16 Leibniz classifies ideas according to dichotomies:
obscure/clear, confused/distinct, adequate/inadequate, symbolic/intuitive.
It is a purely logical classification because Leibniz considers only the cogni-

Logik die ltere Schwester der sthetik in Ansehung der Theorie, sonst wrde in Ansehung
der Ausbung die sthetik die ltere sein. Nach den Ideen, nach welchen wir die Logik ein-
geteilt, werden wir auch die sthetik einteilen. One implication of this text is underlined by
B. C R O C E , Rileggendo /Aesthetica del Baumgarten, Trani 1933 (Extract from 'La Critica', XXXI,
1,1933; reprinted under the title L.'<(Aesthetica del Baumgarten in Storia dell'estetica per saggi, Later-
za, Bari 1942), p. 6: [. . .] egli [Baumgarten] la faceva finita sostanzialmente o radicalmente
con la teora pedaggica della poesa e dell'arte, la quale supponeva la posteriorit della poe-
sa e dell'arte, quasi opere lavorate o comandate dal sapiente e dal filosofo per rivestire di at-
trattive sensibili e sensuali la sola cognitio che si ammettesse, la cognitio lgica. La poesa non
nasce in conseguenza della lgica, perch nata prima di le: non sensualit o diletto sen-
suale, perch cognitio. Croce's essay will henceforth be referred to simply as Rileggendo with
the page numbers from the extract.
14
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes cit., 115: Quum psychologia det firma principia,
nulli dubitamus scientiam dari posse facultatem cognoscitivam inferiorem quae dirigat, aut scientiam sen-
sitive quid cognoscendi.
15
Ch. W O L F F , Psychologia Emprica, edidit et curavit J O A N N E S E C O L E , G. Olms, Hil-
desheim 1968, 54: Facultatis cognoscendi pars inferior dicitur, qua ideas et notiones obscuras at-
que confusas nobis comparamus and 55: Facultatis cognoscendi pars superior est, qua ideas et
notiones distinctas acquirimus.
16
G. W . L E I B N I Z , Meditationes de Cognitione Veritate et Ideis, in Die philosophischen Schriften,
hrsg. von C. I. Gerhard, Georg Olms, Hildesheim, Bd. 4, p. 422: Est ergo cognitio vel ob-
scura vel clara, et clara rursus vel confusa vel distincta, et distincta vel inadaequata vel adae-
quata, item vel symbolica vel intuitiva: et quidem si simul adaequata et intuitiva sit, per-
fectissima est.
44
Pie tro Pimpinella

In the later mature work the concept of aesthetics explicitly covers the
theory of all arts, that is of all liberal arts: aesthetica is theoria artium liberalium.
This larger scope of the concept of aesthetics does not affect his original
content, which remains the same, as it is found in the first paragraph of the
Aesthetica. Aesthetica (theoria liberalium artium, gnoseologia inferior, ars
pulcre cogitandi, ars analogi rationis) est scientia cognitionis sensitivae"5. In
the early work it is stated that oratio sensitiva means discourse involving sen-
sate representations and that philosophical poetics presupposes in the poet
a lower cognitive faculty, which is the source of sensate cognition.6 As in
the Aesthetica it is stated that beauty consists in perfectio cognitionis sensitivae,
similarly in the Meditationes the poem is defined as oratio sensitiva perfecta.1
We need, Baumgarten argues, a logic in its broader sense to guide the
lower cognitive faculty in the sensate cognition of things. He adds: But he
who knows the state of our logic will not be unaware how uncultivated this
field is.8 In fact, logic by its very definition is restricted to rather narrow
limits, as it is considered to be the science for the direction of the higher
cognitive faculty in apprehending the truth. Baumgarten realizes that the
need for a logic of sensate cognition must be met by aesthetics, as he expli-
cidy states in the Metaphysical scientia sensitive cognoscendi et proponendi

conformandum poema Poetice, scientia poetices Philosophia Potica, habitus conficiendipoematis Poe-
sis, eoque habitu gaudens Poeta.
5
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Aesthetica cit., 1. Baumgarten was aware of the originality of his
undertaking: Die sthetik als eine Wissenschaft ist noch neu; man hat zwar hin und wieder
Regeln zum schnen Denken gegeben, aber man hat in den vorigen Zeiten noch nicht den
ganzen Inbegriff aller Regeln in eine systematische Ordnung in Form einer Wissenschaft ge-
bracht, folglich kann auch dieser Name vielen noch unbekannt sein (A. G. B A U M G A R T E N ,
Kollegium ber die sthetik, in B E R N H A R D P O P P E , Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten, Seine Bedeutung
und Stellung in der Leibni^Wolffischen Philosophie und seine Begehungen Kant. Nebst Verffen-
tlichung einer bisher unbekannten Handschrift der sthetik Baumgartens, Robert Noske, Borna-
Leipzig 1907, 1).
6
A. G. B A U M G A R T E N , Meditationes cit., 3: Repraesentationes per partem facultatis
cognoscitivae inferiores sint Sensitivae, 4: Oratio repraesentationum sensitivarum sit sen-
sitiva and 115: Quum vero in loquendo repraesentationes eas habeamus, quas comuni-
camus, supponit philosophia potica facultatem in poeta cognoscitivam inferiorem.
7
Ibid., 7: Oratio sensitiva perfecta est cuius varia tendunt ad cognitionem repraesen-
tationum sensitivarum and 9: Oratio sensitiva perfecta est Poema.
8
Ibid., 115: Haec [facultas] in sensitive cognoscendis rebus dirigenda quidem esset per
Logicam sensu generaliore, sed qui nostram seit logicam, quam incultus hic ager sit, non ne-
sciet. Quid? si ergo quos aretiores in limites reapse includitur Lgica etiam per ipsam defini-
tionem in eosdem redigeretur, habita pro scientia vel facultatem cognostivam superiorem dirigente in
cognoscenda veritate ? Tunc enim daretur occasio philosophis non sine ingenti lucro inquirendi
in ea etiam artificia, quibus inferiores cognoscendi facultates expoliri possent, aeui et ad
emolumentum orbis felicius adhiberi.
48 Pietro Pimpinella

of this cognition.90 The misunderstanding on this point is not surprising,

if one takes into account the complexity of Baumgarten's doctrine of
aesthetic truth and the fact that he couched it in outdated systems of an-
cient rhetoric and poetics. Nevertheless one must bear in mind two
weighty assertions made by Baumgarten himself. Already in the Medi-
tationes he sets rhetoric against general poetics or philosophia potica. Gen-

90
On the extent of the deep-rooted prejudice against rhetoric in the idealistic culture
dominant in Italy during the first half of the century, see C. Vasoli's contribution to the vol-
ume of collected writings Attualit delta retorica, Liviana Editrice, Padova 1975. G. Folena's
introduction mentions the sources of this attitude in nineteenth-century Italian and German
culture. Croce fin da giovanissimo nutre ripugnanza per il tradizionale insegnamento gram-
maticale e retorico ( T . D E M A U R O , Introdu^one alla semantica, Laterza, Bari 1971, p. 1 0 3 ) .
Croce the theorist, whose name is linked with the theory of the identity of language and art,
can but be irritated by the use of rhetoric for the purposes of aesthetics. However Croce the
historian at other times shows a quite different awareness of the importance of rhetoric in
the history of aesthetics. In the essay Ini^ja^jone all'estetica del Settecento ( 1 9 3 3 ) , in which two
fundamental aspects of the aesthetic of this century are sharply distinguished: that linked to
the notion of taste for the beautifull, which Kant also follows, an that linked to l'indagine
del prodursi della poesia e dell'arte, Croce writes: Siffatta indagine intorno alia natura della
poesia e dell'arte era in corso da secoli, formando una tradizione scientifica che potrebbe de-
nominarsi 'aristotlica' in quanto procedeva soprattutto dalla Potica e dalla Retorica aristo-
tlica: una tradizione parallela all'altra sul bello, e che, anche dove pareva che a questa in cer-
to modo si accostasse o s'intrecciasse, ne rimaneva intimamente distinta e distaccata. Qui si
travagliava e cresceva la vera e propria Esttica, ed strano (o strano non , per g anzidetti
preconcetti sul primato delle idee di bello e di piacere) che gli storici dell'Estetica abbiano
gettata quella tradizione nel fondo del quadro, quando addirittura non l'hanno ignorata (Sto-
ria dell'esteticaper saggi cit., p. 134). It is paradoxical that Croce himself ignores this tradition in
his essay on Baumgarten: the Aristotelian line which inspires Baumgarten in his criticism of
Plato and Cicero and consequently in the use he makes of rhetoric in the Aesthetica, is mistak-
en for the vulgata of Platonic position. Again at the end of the brief essay Esttica del Rinasci-
mento. Ea potica di Fracastoro ( 1 9 2 4 ) , Croce writes: Non dimentichiamo che l'Estetica, in
quanto scienza filosofica della poesia, si matura nel corso del Seicento come dottrina della
elocuzione o persuasione retorica contrapposta a quella della dimostrazione dialettica, come
lgica della poesia, contrapposta alia lgica della filosofa e della scienza. Cosi nel Baum-
garten, ideatore di una speciale scienza della Aesthetica; cosi nel gigante Vico, che era di pro-
fessione un maestro di retorica (ibid. p. 38). Paradoxically in Rileggendo Croce forgets this dis-
tinction between the logic of poetry and the logic of science attributing Baumgarten, as we
have seen, a conception of Veritas aesthetica as una forma di verit che dovrebbe essere in-
sieme conforme alla esigenza peculiare della concezione monistico-astratta o gradale
quantitativa la medesima di quella lgica, quantunque imperfetta. This criticism occurs
around three decades after the essays contained in part VI (Per la storia dell'estetica italiana) of
Problemi di Esttica, in which Croce shows his first-hand knowledge of the Renaissance and
seventeeth-century dbats on retoric, on the relations between rhetoric and dialectic, and on
the logical implications of these debates.