Abstract

There is a famous line in the first treatise ever on aesthetics written by A. G. Baumgarten in 1750/58: "What is abstraction, if not a loss?" The 'loss' or deficiency refers to a main aesthetical category to this day, encompassing syntactical and semantical complexity. On one hand it distinguishes works of art from works of science in a specific manner. Works of art can symbolize the ontological richness of individuals, i. e. entities, which are 'omnimode determinatum'. On the other hand there are a number of analogies holding between the aesthetical symbolizations of art and in a wider sense the empirical sciences, so that art can be understood as a form of cognition. With this conception Baumgarten anticipates basic precepts of one of the most influential epistemologies and aesthetics of our time. According to my interpretation, four of Nelson Goodman's five symptoms of art can be reduced to repleteness or complexity. The paper analyses the concept of repleteness and deficiency of aesthetic symbolization in art and science in both conceptions. It will be argued, that the metaphysically grounded theory of Baumgarten complements Goodman's semantical theory in a productive way. Taken further, both philosophical conceptions also pose effective means of understanding and interpreting works of contemporary art