Fiction

Most of us have had the experience of watching a movie, and at a point of extreme tension, averting our eyes, because we 'cannot bear to watch' , e. g. some impending violence. What we do not do under those circumstances is remind ourselves that what we are watching is not real, or that we have suspended disbelief when entering the theater. In fact, there are real occasions, e. g. during a sporting event, when we similarly just have to stop watching. This example, which can be generalized to any experience of fiction, in any medium, demonstrates that what transpires in any perception is fundamentally independent of questions of veridicality. Such perception might not be as rudimentary as a mere mechanical reflex, but it is not as complex as conscious reflection, either. Causal theories would seem to be correct, at least to the extent that perception is an effect of a transmission to us, and, in the case of an artistic product, we are being manipulated, as well. For the most part, questions as to the truth of an experience come after the fact, say, when what is presented in other experiences conflicts with the original one. One exception can be inferred from phases of fictitious presentations, in which a piece might be said to 'hit a wrong note'. This is an example of the disruption of the internal coherence of a work, and it is at such moments that the work is taken to be 'unconvincing'. So, whether inter- or intra-experience, fictitious or otherwise, coherence would seem to be a sufficient condition for the attribution of Truth. And, to the extent that we are manipulated by an artist, the aesthetic judgement of the work can attach first and foremost to how our cognitive faculties are so manipulated, which is Kant's point is classifying such judgement as 'reflective'.