That all readings, which come from human, should be faced critically as it can't be pure of personal interest.


TEras #10: Paul Oskar Kristeller, about history of the Fine Art system

OK so this is what I got from Kristeller. I would say that somehow I enjoy reading his works. It makes me want to read other writings in triple A, including Ranciere, which is a good thing, absolutely.

Who is Kristeller?

Paul Oskar Kristeller (May 22, 1905 in Berlin – June 7, 1999 in New YorkUSA) was an important scholar of Renaissance humanism. He was awarded the Haskins Medal in 1992. He was last active as Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Columbia University in New York, where he mentored both Irving Louis Horowitz and A. James Gregor. (wiki)

His influence:

The emphasis of Kristeller's research was on the philosophy of Renaissance humanism. He is the author of important studies on Marsilio FicinoPietro Pomponazzi and Giambattista Vico.An especially important achievement is his Iter Italicum (the title recalls Iter Alemannicum and other works of Martin Gerbert), a large work describing numerous uncatalogued manuscripts. After decades of neglect, Kristeller's lengthy, erudite essay of the early 1950s, "The Modern System of the Arts", in Journal of the History of Ideas, proved to be an influential, much reprinted classic reading in Philosophy of Art. (wiki)

Kristeller tells us that in the history of ‘fine arts’ before ‘modern age’ or 18th century, actually paintings rarely mentioned. Fine arts, long time ago, includes poetry, rhetoric, music, sculpture, astronomy, medicine, mathematics, etc. It even includes matters that we classify as science.  Before renaissance Paintings is classify as the act of imitation, as well as sculpture.
Considering previous reading about Kant and Hume, the definition of ‘beauty’ in ancient Greek, either, is not only limited to physical beauty but also related with beautiful habits, personal act, etc.

16th century - Renaissance

·         Renaissance writers want their paintings to be recognized as liberal art. To enhance the social and prestige of paintings and other visual art to be as good as poetry, rhetoric, and music.
·         Leonardo Da Vinci tried to emphasize a relationship of painting and mathematic and anatomy.
·         1563 in Florence, painters, sculptors, and architects builds Academy of Art, in influence of Vasari[1]. The curriculum includes anatomy and mathematics.

16th to 18th century                                                                                       

·         Writings show comparative between paintings and poetry.
·         1546 – Benedetto Varchii compare paintings and sculpture
·         Leonardo’s Paragone which argues for the superiority of paintings from poetry, music, and sculpture.  (Kristeller, 1951-2)
·         The definition of beauty in Renaissance still borrowing ancient talk (personal beauty and so on).[2]
·         The writers in this century didn’t make attempt to separate fine arts with science.[3]

17th century

·         Cultural leadership moved from Italy to French
·         Painting becomes more flourish
·         1635 Academie Francaise, French language, poetry, literature,
·         1648 Academie royale de Painture et de Sculpture
·         More academies for music, architecture, dance, three visual arts, and then academy of sciences which have no relation to fine arts.
·         There are development in theoretical and critical literature of visual art in particular.[4]
·         The parallel between poetry and painting important to the writers. The terms Beaux Art which seems related with visual arts alone, actually related with music and poetry as well.[5]
·         In this century there is a rise of emancipation of the natural science.[6] After Galileo and Descrates works have been completed. Academies des Science[7] and Royal Societies became active.
·         Querelle des Anciens et Modernes. Two points: (1) various field of human endeavor leads to various classification of knowledge and culture, (2) there are two kinds of fields: mathematical basis and talent-critique basis.[8] Separation between science and art.
·         Music mentioned in the last part of science, in Charles Perrault’s book.[9]

18th century - French

·         Interest in music and visual art increased
·         Beauty by J.P. de Crousaz (1714) is an important attempt to divide beauty definition from goodness.
·         Abbe Dubos (1719): analogies between painting and poetries and the difference between them without any interest in judging which one more prestigious. First writing about poetry and painting from the amateurs, which states that the best judgment comes from the amateur.[10]
·         Dubos includes poetry in Beaux Art
·         Abbe Batteux (1746): a system of fine arts. He separates fine arts which have pleasures to their end, from mechanical arts. Fine arts includes music, poetry, painting, sculpture, and dance. There’s a third group who combine pleasure and usefulness, which includes: eloquence, and architecture.
·         Jean de Ront d’Alembert[11] in Discourse Preliminaire divide knowledge into: Philosophy (grammar, eloquence, history, natural science), and those cognition which consist an imitation (painting, sculpture, architecture, poetry, music).[12]
·         Encyclopédie[13]
·         Larcombe portable dictionary of Fine Art covers: architecture, sculpture, engraving, painting, poetry, and music.

18th century - England

·         Henry Pecham[14]: treatrise of painting, influenced by Renaissance.
·         After Querelle influence spread from French, William Wotton: tried to cover systematically all human art and activities.[15]
·         History of The Wars of Ancients and Moderns (1705), works in England which is related with Querelle.
·         Anthony, Earl of Shaftesbury: considered as founder of modern aesthetics. He did not make distinction between aesthetic and moral beauty. And his moral sense still include both ethical and aesthetic objects. He writes about imagination… the pleasure of imagination has to be found in the works such as architecture, sculpture, painting, poetry, music, gardening,
·         After Shaftesbury: distinction between ethic and aesthetic.
·         The necessary art, and the art of elegance. (James Harris)[16]

18th century - Germany

·         Baumgarten: gives definition of term aesthetic: is the theory of sensuous knowledge, which is a counterpart of logic as a theory of intellectual knowledge, firstly related to poetry and rhetoric, and later gives the theory to all arts including music and visual art.
·         Georg Friedrich Meier: limit the theory only to literature (?)
·         Laokoon (1766): put an end to the parallel between painting and sculpture.
·         Mendelsshon: demands fine art (painting, sculpture, music, dance, architecture) and belles letters (poetry, eloquence) reduced to same common principle better than imitation.
·         Sulzer: General Theory of The Fine Art, covers poetry, eloquence, music, visual art.
·         Goethe: ridicules the idea of grouping all the arts altogether which very different from each other, but in the end he accept Fine Art system.
·         Herder: active contribute to classify the Fine Art.
Back to Kant as Conclussion

Kant states that he didn’t follow Baumgarten’s terminology since he does not believe in any possibility of philosophical theory of the arts. Kant gives division of Fine Arts: plastic art (sculpture, architecture, painting, and gardening), speaking art (poetry and eloquence), art of the beautiful play of sentiments (music and the art of color).[17]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giorgio_Vasari, last modified on 20 July 2014 at 10:08, last accessed on 26 August 2014 at 5:52 PM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Academy_of_Sciences, last modified on 13 August 2014 at 14:59, last accessed on 26 August 2014 at 7:13 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Oskar_Kristeller,  last modified on 12 August 2014 at 02:31, last accessed on 26 August 2014 at 8:04 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_le_Rond_d'Alembert, last modified on 30 July 2014 at 03:05, last accessed on 26 August 2014 at 8:21 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Peacham, last modified on 20 June 2014 at 08:22, last accessed on 26 August 2014 8:48 PM

[1] 1511-1574, Italian Architect and Painters who first classify Paintings along with Sculpture and Architectural works. His writing titled “Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects” is the first encyclopedia of best art work during his time. (en.wikipedia.com)
[2] KRISTELLER, P. O. 1951-2. The Modern System of the Arts: a study in the history of aesthetics [parts 1 & 2]. Journal of the History of Ideas, 12, 13, 496-527, 17-46. p.186
[3] Ibid. p.189
[4] Ibid. p. 191
[5] Ibid. p.192
[6] Ibid. p.193
[7] Academies des Science in France, first known president is Napoleon Bonaparte, started in suggestion from Jean Baptise-Colbert with a small group of scholar who met in Kings Library. (en.wikipedia.com)
[8] KRISTELLER, P. O. 1951-2. The Modern System of the Arts: a study in the history of aesthetics [parts 1 & 2]. Journal of the History of Ideas, 12, 13, 496-527, 17-46. P.193-194
[9] Ibid. p.194
[10] Ibid. p.198
[11] D’Alembert was French mathematician, mechanician, Physicist, philosopher, and music theorist. The wave equation or D’Alembert formula is the most well-known thing related to him. (en.wikipedia.com)
[12] KRISTELLER, P. O. 1951-2. The Modern System of the Arts: a study in the history of aesthetics [parts 1 & 2]. Journal of the History of Ideas, 12, 13, 496-527, 17-46. p.202
[13] Encyclopédie, ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers (English: Encyclopaedia, or a Systematic Dictionary of the Sciences, Arts, and Crafts) was a general encyclopedia published in France between 1751 and 1772, with later supplements, revised editions, and translations. It was edited by Denis Diderot and, until 1759, co-edited by Jean le Rond d'Alembert. (e.wikipedia.org)
[14] Henry Peacham is the name shared by two English Renaissance writers who were father and son. The elder Henry Peacham (1546–1634) was an English curate, best known for his treatise on rhetoric titled The Garden of Eloquence first published in 1577. He lived atLeverton-in-Holland, in Lincolnshire.[1] His son, Henry Peacham (b. 1578, d. in or after 1644) was a poet and writer,[2] known today primarily for his book, The Compleat Gentleman, first printed in 1622. It is presented as a guidebook on the arts for young men of good birth. In it, he discusses what writers, poets, composers, philosophers, and artists a gentlemen should study in order to become well-educated. Because he mentions a large number of contemporary artistic figures, he is often cited as a primary source in studies of Renaissance artists.
[15] KRISTELLER, P. O. 1951-2. The Modern System of the Arts: a study in the history of aesthetics [parts 1 & 2]. Journal of the History of Ideas, 12, 13, 496-527, 17-46. p. 205
[16] Ibid. p.209.
[17] Ibid. p.224

Coffee Cup #37: Beautiful Habit

I am looking at history of 'beauty' in terms of aesthetic and judgment of taste. And I reach a flashback part to ancient Greek where the definition of beauty is actually related with not only phisical beauty (as in Kant's definition) but also beautiful habits. So here I am... so envy to anyone who have beautiful habits.

'Beautiful habits' reminds me of Stephen Covey's book, of course. But it also reminds me of Hasan Al-Banna in a biografi titled "Detik-Detik Hidupku". Little Hasan has something that I call beautiful habits, as his brother describes: from Qiyamul Lail until around 8am when he has to go to school, they studied Qur'an, Hadist, Fiqh, and Tarikh every single day. No wonder he became a hafidz and an Imam. 

As for me, changing the habit is a hard thing to do. I have many things to change for example:
- eating instant food
- enourmous consumption of coffee
- cat nap, even when it is actually night, if you can imagine
- always in a hurry

Well I hope it wont be a like 'bridget jones diary' in which part she wants to make a new year resolution. She has bad habits; and while she makes that resolution she knows that she won't change it.... 


Umar bin Abdul Aziz menulis surat kepada Abu Bakar Ibnu Hazm sebagai berikut, "Perhatikanlah, apa yang berupa hadist Rasulullah saw. maka tulislah, karena sesungguhnya aku khawatir ilmu agama tidak dipelajari lagi, dan ulama akan wafat. Janganlah engkau terima sesuatu selain hadist Nabi saw. Sebarluaskanlah ilmu dan ajarilah orang yang tidak mengerti sehingga dia mengerti. Karena, ilmu itu tidak akan binasa (lenyap) kecuali kalau ia dibiarkan rahasia (tersembunyi) pada seseorang." (Ringkasan Shahih Bukhari, Al-albani, Kitab Ilmu, Bab 35 dikutip dalam kata pengantar oleh Sofyan Efendi dalam Ringkasan Kitab Hadist Shahih Imam Muslim edisi Bahasa Indonesia 2007)


I enjoy it, really. It is just about particular moments that I wish.. come sooner. =/

TEras #9: Immanuel Kant - Judgment of Taste and Definiton of Beauty


Immanuel Kant. My first research of anything usually starts at Wikipedia, although the validity of the source is still questionable. Still an efficient start though…

Firstly, I read about him being mentioned by John Mcarthur and Naomi Stead in The Sage Handbook of Architectural Theory[1] where his ideas considered as strongest philosophical expression of modern ideas on aesthetic feelings and practices.[2] His philosiphical ideas in aesthetic related with theological theory; and his discussion ranges between churches and religious architecture. This notes related with his view of judgment of taste. 

Who is Kant?

Directly quoted from Wikipedia

Immanuel Kant (German: [ɪˈmaːnu̯eːl kant]; 22 April 1724 – 12 February 1804) was a German philosopher who is widely considered to be a central figure of modern philosophy. He argued that fundamental concepts structure human experience, and that reason is the source of morality. His thought continues to have a major influence in contemporary thought, especially the fields of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, and aesthetics.[1]

Kant’s major books:  Critique of Pure Reason which dealt with logic. Critique of Practical Reason (Kritik der praktischen Vernunft, 1788), the Metaphysics of Morals (Die Metaphysik der Sitten, 1797), which dealt with ethics, and the Critique of Judgment (Kritik der Urteilskraft, 1790), which looks at aesthetics and teleology.

1.      The judgment of taste is aesthetic

The word ‘aesthetic’ itself, according to Oxford Dictionary, is developed in late 18th century. It is spoken as ‘relating to perception by the senses’. Aesthetics origin is from Greek aisthētikos, fromaisthēta 'perceptible things', from aisthesthai 'perceive'.

The sense 'concerned with beauty' was coined in German in the mid-18th century and adopted into English in the early 19th century, but its use was controversial until much later in the century.[3]

Aesthetic judgment in Kant terminology is a kind of judgment which is not logical, purely base on feeling. Later in the book, Kant gives the definition of Taste: “Taste is the faculty for judging an object or a kind of representation through a satisfaction or dissatisfaction without any interest”.[4] Andr he also gives definition of beautiful: “That is beautiful which pleases universally without concept”.[5] “Beauty is a form of the purposiveness of an object, insofar as it is perceived in it without representation of and end.”[6] The definition of purposiveness explained in 10th point. Last definition of beauty: “That is beautiful which is cognized without concept as the object of necessary satisfaction”.[7]

2.      The satisfaction that determines the judgment of taste is without interest

And he also give a definition of interest: a satisfaction that we combine with the representation of the existence of an object[8].

Interest /ˈɪnt(ə)rɪst  [MASS NOUN] The feeling of wanting to know or learn about something or someone: ‘she looked about her with interest[IN SINGULAR]: he developed an interest in art.[9]

After discuss this reading in my research group, I found that ‘interest’ that Kant uses means that the person can take benefit from the object, including benefit in form of pleasure feeling or satisfied the need.

This part reminds me of the book Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry[10] about how Little Prince’s interest in the Rose make his judgment of the flower too bias. However the judgment in this story is not related with beauty in appearance only, but also in inner quality. So probably this kind of judgment will be more related with Kant’s following explanation.

3.      The satisfaction in the agreeable is combined with interest

Kant’s definition of agreeable is: that which pleases the sense in sensation.[11] He explains that everything that please, just because it pleases, is agreeable.[12] And there is variation of agreeable sensations: graceful, lovely, enchanting, enjoyable, etc.

Please /pliːz/ [WITH OBJECT] 1 Cause to feel happy and satisfied: ‘he arranged a fishing trip to please his son’ [WITH OBJECT AND INFINITIVE]: ‘it pleased him to be seen with someone in the news’[13]
SensatioN /sɛnˈseɪʃ(ə)n NOUN 1 A physical feeling or perception resulting from something that happens to or comes into contact with the body: ‘a burning sensation in the middle of the chest’[14]

I have to say here that what I perceive from Kant’s point is that the term agreeable’ is constantly related with please. Referring to Kant’s explanation, agreeable is really subjective. It is a matter of whether the subject feel pleased no matter how the object is. Kant also states that ‘hence one says of the agreeable not merely that it pleases but that it gratifies.

Gratify /ˈɡratɪfʌɪ/ VERB (gratifies, gratifying, gratified) [WITH OBJECT] 1 Give (someone) pleasure or satisfaction: ‘she was gratified to see the shock in Jim’s eyes’ (as adjective gratifying) ‘the results were gratifying’ ORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense 'make pleasing'): from French gratifier or Latin gratificari 'give or do as a favour', from gratus 'pleasing, thankful'.[15]

Well, gratify is more to thankful feeling, I suppose.

4.      The satisfaction in the good is combined with interest

Concept of the good is more closely related to the usefulness. “…when I call something that gratifies at the same time good can be seen from the fact that in the case of the good there is always the question whether it is merely mediately good or immediately good (whether it is useful or good in itself)”.[16]

“In order to find something good, I must always know what sort of thing the object is supposed to be”.[17] It means that there is an interest to the object. Case closed.

5.      Comparison of the three specifically different kinds of satisfaction

This part is the conclusion. “Agreeable is that which everyone calls what gratifies him; beautiful, what merely pleases him (without interest - ed); good, what is esteemed, approved”.[18] And it also related with “to inclination, to favor, and to respect”.[19]

Esteem /ɪˈstiːm/ VERB [WITH OBJECT] 1 Respect and admire: ‘many of these qualities are esteemed by managers’ (as adjective, with submodifier esteemed) ‘a highly esteemed scholar’.[20]
Inclination /ɪnklɪˈneɪʃ(ə)n / [MASS NOUN] 1 A person’s natural tendency or urge to act or feel in a particular way; a disposition: ’John was a scientist by training and inclination’ ’Fanny showed little inclination to talk about anything serious’ [COUNT NOUN]: ‘he was free to follow his inclinations’ (inclination for/to/towards) An interest in or liking for (something): ‘my inborn inclination for things with moving parts’.[21]

In this part Kant refer to favor as the only free satisfaction.[22]

6.      The beautiful is that which, without concept, is represented as the object of a universal satisfaction.

The definition of beautiful in this part is deduced from “object satisfaction without any interest”.[23] In this term, someone who said that an object is beautiful must aware that universally everyone else will also call the object beautiful, not just himself. “…must contain a ground of satisfaction for everyone…”[24]

7.      Comparison of the beautiful with the agreeable and the good through the above characteristic

Can I conclude that taste is universal according to Kant’s description?

8.      The universality of the satisfaction is represented in a judgment of taste only as subjective

I don’t understand this particular part, because the statement itself is contradictive. How can the judgment of taste become universal and subjective at the same time? Is that means that within everyone there is a same barometer to judge the object beautiful or not at the first glimpse (without interest)?

9.      Investigation of the question: whether in the judgment of taste the feeling of pleasure precedes the judging of the object or the later precedes the former

How and whether aesthetic judgment a priori is possible? So the judgment, even though singular and without comparison to others, is in agreement with the condition of universality.

10.  On purposiveness in general

Can I say that purposiveness is the essential quality of the object? This purposiveness related to the essential from in which the object should being represented. And in this part it is important to remember that in a pure judgment we better don’t know about the function or the concept of the object.

11.  The judgment of taste has nothing but the form of the purposiveness of an object (or the way of representing it) as its ground

In this part Kant discuss about the mere form of purposiveness of the object that is given to us, can constitute the satisfaction that we judge. [25] I want to ground a question: is this related to honesty, simplicity and banal representation of the object, is purposiveness is indeed an essential quality of the object?

12.  The judgment of taste rests on a priori ground

A priori means that it is deduced from theory or already within human being, not from observation or experiments

13.  The pure judgment of taste is independent from charm and emotion

Pure judgment is without interest. Ok. But when I read this part I am actually confused. Judgment of taste is based on feeling – it’s aesthetic. How can it be detached from emotion? Because emotion means there is an interest in there? It is actually explained later in 14th point.

14.  Elucidation by means of examples

Aesthetic judgment can be divided into empirical and pure. The more simple the form, the more pure the judgment. (?) An object doesn’t have to have charm in order to be called beautiful. Kant gives a definition of emotion: a sensation in which agreeableness is produced only by means of a momentarily inhibition followed by a stronger outpouring of the vital force.[26]

15.  The judgment of taste is entirely independent from the concept of perfection

Because perfection needs concept. Simply.

16.  The judgment of taste through which an object is declared to be beautiful under the condition of a determinate concept is not pure

In this part he gives an example of flower and botanist. How we, ordinary people can judge the beauty of the flower purely because we are detached from all the knowledge of the structure, function, system, of the flower. This situation also applied to architect when judging a building. Can an architect judge a taste of building with all the concept that he has about architecture.

17.  On the ideal of beauty

In this part Kant tries to explain that the faculty of judgment of taste is empirically shown deeply buried in all human being, of unanimity in the judging of forms under which objects are given to them.[27]And it means that some products of taste are regarded as exemplary or could be acquired by imitating others. I want to give simple example here. When we first learn how to judge taste of food whether it is sour, sweet, salty, spicy, etc. We recognize the taste itself instantly but we learn how to address the taste from others. The parent said “this is sweet” while we taste honey and sugar, so we recognize that kind of sense we experience on our tongue is sweet.

But as it is already discussed before. Beauty is universal and the judgment of taste is without interest.
Kant gives definition of idea: a concept of reason; and ideal: the representation of an individual being adequate to an idea. While talking about the ideal beauty then it is not speaking about the pure judgment of taste anymore, but a partly intellectualized judgment of taste.

There are two elements involved: the aesthetic normal idea = an individual intuition; and the idea of reason = more closely with the experience gathered from nature. There is an example, what if, the ideal is empirically processed within the human, because the idea of reason is gathered from experience of nature. Then Chinese people, white people, Indonesian people will have different kind of ideal beauty. And then the beauty is about the correctness of the species, the correctness within a Chinese beauty only, for example. The judgment of ideal beauty, then, is not a pure judgment of taste. This judgment with standard can never be purely aesthetic.

18.  What the modality of a judgment of taste is

That the judgment of taste at least possibly combined with a pleasure.

19.  The subjective necessity that we ascribe to the judgment of taste is conditioned

What is the condition? That all the data that are required for the judging is given, as the rule of approval of everyone else. The judgment should be also common to all.

20.  Condition of necessity that is alleged by a judgment of taste is the idea of a common sense

So in this part Kant gives a definition of common sense: “a subjective principle, which determines what pleases or displeases only through feeling and not through concept, but yet with universal validity.”[28] And the term common sense is different with collective majority census/ opinion.

21.  Whether one has good reason to presuppose a common sense

The universal communicability presupposes a common sense. The common sense actually must be able to be assumed with good reason, and indeed without appeal to psychological observations, but rather as the necessary condition of the universal communicability of our cognition.[29]

22.  The necessity of the universal assent that is thought is a judgment of taste is a subjective necessity, which is represented as objective under the presupposition of a common sense

The most interesting explanation is even though the judgment of taste is universal and when we call something beautiful then everyone should agree; it does not say that everyone will agree. They should.

The little prince, San Diego :, Harcourt.


[1] MACARTHUR, J. & STEAD, N. 2012. Introduction: architecture and aesthetics. In: CRYSLER, C. G., STEPHEN, C. & HILDE, H. (eds.) The SAGE handbook of architectural theory. London, United Kingdom: Sage Publications. p.125
[2] Ibid.
[3] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/aesthetic
[4] KANT, I. & GUYER, P. 2000. Critique of the power of judgment, Cambridge, UK ; New York, Cambridge University Press. p.96
[5] Ibid. p.104
[6] Ibid. p.120
[7] Ibid. p.124
[8] Ibid. p.90
[9] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/interest
[10] SAINT-EXUPEЃRY, A. D. & HOWARD, R. 2000. Petit prince
The little prince, San Diego :, Harcourt.
[11] KANT, I. & GUYER, P. 2000. Critique of the power of judgment, Cambridge, UK ; New York, Cambridge University Press. p.91
[12] Ibid.
[13] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/please
[14] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sensation
[15] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/gratify
[16] KANT, I. & GUYER, P. 2000. Critique of the power of judgment, Cambridge, UK ; New York, Cambridge University Press. p.93
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid. p.95
[19] Ibid.
[20] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/esteem
[21] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/inclination
[22] KANT, I. & GUYER, P. 2000. Critique of the power of judgment, Cambridge, UK ; New York, Cambridge University Press. p.95
[23] Ibid. p.96
[24] Ibid. p.97
[25] Ibid. p.106
[26] Ibid. p.111
[27] Ibid. p.116
[28] Ibid. p.122
[29] Ibid. p.123