An infinity pool initially struggles with beauty.
One of Kant's criteria for beauty is Disinterestedness
This will be difficult for the infinity pool - there is scarcely a commodity out there that doesn't proclaim its beauty to be a selling point and where more than in that particular aspect found in so many holiday brochures - the one where the sky, the sea and the pool, are one but for haze and the slip of its two horizons.
The infinity pool becomes an object of some collective holidaying desire. whether or not we actively seek to find ourselves in an infinity pool is not the point, we have to deal with our interest (found in our desire or not - or found in our consumer identity).
For Kant - I experience a something as beautiful when I like it without any interest. I should be free from any kind of desire, aim, or purpose, or any social, moral, or intel- lectual considerations. My faculties should be in free play. Steven Shaviro proposes we consider passion when trying to understand Kant's disinterestedness. "The scandal of passion is that it is utterly gratuitous: it has no grounding, and no proper occasion. In this sense, it is entirely free (though I am not free with regard to it)." (Shaviro - without criteria)
**More on Disinterestedness**
It may be a similar need of ours to find a synonym for Kant's "pleasing". Kant proposes both beauty and the sublime as pleasing. but i feel a need not to settle for the obvious meanings of "pleasing". Since Kant the post-structuralist have worked extremely well to show us the performativity of any such signifier, and not only this Meillassoux goes further and has proposed a hyperchaos in which everything either could or could not change at any moment without need of reason.
(1) However i am fearful to apply this thinking to our dealings with Kant's notion's of beauty as I am initially not sure if i will break the careful parameters of Meillassoux's project doing so, as well of the dangers of summoning a performative contradiction or absurdity in trying to follow Kant's logic after undermining it (only so i don't get confused though).
What we can at least do is grab the imaginative imperitive of Meillassoux's thinking and run with it.
Pleasing, wether through the performativitiy of post structuralism, or the Hyperchaos of meillassoux can definitely be other than something that is - > Nice
***MORE CONTENT TO COME
NOTES
With our reading through Quentin Meillassoux's project we will perhaps have to come to an understanding of pleasing which is not founded on empirical, "collective solipsism" of the correlationist but can however factor experience into its maybe-function in the world.
perhaps it is here that we will have to start elaborating on Kant and look to those who have followed him and played a role in the development of contemporary thought. Lyotard - Whitehead - Deleuze - Meilassoux
The postmodern - the end of Meta-Narratives - Lyotard.
Pleasing - being able to be individuated - Deleuze
Pleasing being able to be immanently produced in the becoming of the subject - Whitehead
or Pleasing being a may-being of meillassoux's radical contingency.
Pleasing is not an issue for Meta-Narratives, it is an aspect of the sublime which Lyotard, one of the key thinkers of
