Aesthetic Value Flashcards
What effect do disagreements about ‘less objective’ issues often have on us?
They matter more to us
What is meant by semantics here?
What do claims mean?
Can they be true/false?
What is meant by psychology here?
What sort of mental state is involved in accepting moral & aesthetic beliefs
What role does this mental state play in actions/behaviour
What is meant by metaphysics here?
Is there moral/aesthetical reality?
What is meant by epistemology here?
Is ethical/aesthetical knowledge obtainable?
What are the key areas of enquiry for these issues?
Semantics
Psychology
Metaphysics
Epistemology
How are terms subjective?
When they are reporting what the subject feels (even if presented objectively)
What is important to note about subjective claims?
We don’t disagree this way
You say how you feel and I say how I feel
What is important to remember about objective claims?
They do not need to be true to be objective
But generally easy to resolve and reasons can be given
What is a broad meaning of aesthetics?
Responses and experience of certain objects of perception
doesn’t necessarily have to be perceptible - eg maths equation
What characterises responses and experiences of an aesthetics nature?
Pleasurable responses in us
BUT
Not every pleasurable experience is an experience of beauty (eg food and sex)
What is meant by beauty?
‘Aesthetic value’
What are some rules that provide evidence for beauty being objective?
The Golden Section
The Rule of Three
Provide some alternatives explaining beauty
- Evolutionary explanations (eg sex appeal in bodies = good genes)
- Subconscious explanations (beauty = pleasure = satisfaction of sensuous appetite)
- Ideological explanations (state invent values to control)
What is taste?
The ability to discern beauty
See lecture 5 for differences between Hume and Kant
Yes
What would be general principles of aesthetic evaluation?
Would link objective properties (eg it is wooden) of objects to overall evaluations of these objects
What are the three levels of property involved in art?
- Objective properties - descriptive properties
- Aesthetic properties - evaluative properties (eg it is vibrant)
- Overall evaluations
What are the relationships between the levels of property involved in art?
Overall evaluations are based off of aesthetics properties, and aesthetic properties are based off of descriptive properties
How do we get from one property/level to another?
Need general principles that objective properties A and B => aesthetic properties
It therefore must always be the case that A and B => AE
What are common I art criticism?
- Verdict
- Reason
- The Norm
What is special about the Norm?
General principle, bringing level 2 and 3 together
Any work which has that quality is good
Why might there be aesthetic principles?
- Critics provide reasons for their judgements
- Reasons are general: if same circumstances obtain in another situation, then the same reason applies
- Critics appeal to objective properties to justify aesthetic principles that justify overall evaluation
It works so must be some (at least implicit) principles at work
See lecture 6 for objections to aesthetic principles
Yes
What is valence?
An inherent polarity, either negative or positive, that belongs to the concept of a property irrespective of its instantiation in any particular context
What is an argument against valence and what is an alternative approach?
Polarity can be switched -> eg tension can be good and bad in a film, context is important
Therefore particularism
Describe the view of Generalism
The reasons we give in aesthetic evaluations are general in nature
If artwork is good cos it has A, then A is a good-making property wherever it is found
Describe the view of Particularim
There are no general reasons in aesthetic evaluations
A good artwork may have A, but does not mean A is always and everywhere a good-making property
Describe realism
Aesthetic terms refer to properties the object has
Describe what Anti-Realism might argue
Ae properties add a new layer to the world that doesn’t need to be there
What is one possible objection to the relationship between objective principles and aesthetic ones? Give an example
Objective principles not necessarily sufficient for aesthetic principles/concepts
Just cos art possesses it, doesn’t mean it will result in aesthetic principles
eg Anyone can see something is colourful but not that its moving - need a certain perception to do so
What is Levison’s take on aesthetic principles?
Properties are ways of being/appearing
eg might only be beautiful to humans, and even then in certain conditions
Therefore, condition dependence
What is the fundamental basis for the rise in formalism?
People generally see representation in art (eg a dog) first before colour - content vs form
What is Clive Bell’s extreme view on our perception of aesthetic properties?
Need only “a sense of form and colour and a knowledge of three-dimensional space”
No prior context/knowledge needed
Describe the main opinion of Formalism
Recognises the primacy of formal qualities (eg line, colour, texture etc)
List some features of Formalism
- Egalitarian
- Emotional experience
Describe how formalism is an egalitarian approach
Anyone can appreciate art, not just critics, no special ‘aesthetic faculty’ (taste)
Describe what is meant, in formalism, of art provoking an emotional experience?
Emotional experience not found elsewhere in human experience (like Hume and morality)
The value of art has nothing to do with our ordinary everyday emotion (from life)
What creates the aesthetic emotional experience of ‘calm ecstacy’ described by Bell?
Significant form
Why would someone choose formalism?
- Explains possible aesthetic interest in works with mundane content (eg Van Gogh)
- Explains aesthetic interest in things conflicting with our beliefs (eg ‘Triumph of the Will’) - aka Extreme Autonomism
- Unifies highly diverse aesthetic phenomena
How does Clive believe formalism is unifying?
All different types of art are art because of their significant form
What is the idea of Aesthetic Empiricism?
That the aesthetic value of a work is a matter of how it appears
See 36min of Lecture 8 recording for each school’s unifying empiricist values
Yes
What are the 4 main objections to formalism?
- Forgeries
- Ignores the aesthetic relevance (eg history)
- Too unifying: fails to recognise difference between art and nature
- More generally a fundamental misunderstanding of how perception works
What would a formalist response likely be to the objection of forgeries?
Just snobbery, these aren’t aesthetic properties
but aren’t they? Refer to originality in an evaluative way
Describe Enlightened Empiricism
Relevant non-aesthetic based properties include more than just colour and shape
Just formalism but with wider scope of consideration
Outline the psychological thesis
How we experience it, what properties it has, depends on what category it is in (eg genres, styles etc)
What is considered in Walton’s ‘categories of art’?
- Standard features
- Variable features
- Contra-standard features
Describe what is meant by standard features and give examples
Determine category membership - not aesthetically interesting
eg for paintings, flatness, motionless etc
Describe what is meant by variable features and give examples
Properties differing across works in some category - highly aesthetically interesting
eg for paintings, colours and shapes
Describe what is meant be contra-standard variables and give examples
Presence of these properties tend to disqualify it from that category
eg for paintings, moving-parts or 3-D
How does Walton attempt to navigate around the psychological thesis objection of Guernicas?
The Normative thesis:
Can still perceive artwork in different ways, but not relative cos there is still a proper way to see it
What is the main difference between our perception of art and nature?
We approach artworks as having meaning behind them (something hidden and unobvious - waiting to be discovered), not so much the case for nature, matter of form mostly
What is ‘Option 1’ for principles of art and nature?
- Art appreciation: Needs to be informed, EE
- Nature appreciation: Formalism
^we lose theoretical unity but maybe this isn’t important, we just appreciate them differently
What is ‘Option 2’ (Walton) for principles of art and nature?
- Art appreciation: EE incl. Normative thesis
- Nature appreciation: EE without Normative thesis
What is ‘Option 3’ (Alan Carlson) for principles of art and nature?
- Art appreciation: EE incl. Normative thesis
- Nature appreciation: EE incl. Normative thesis
^relevant contextual facts simply change from historical/social ones to scientific ones
What is ‘Option 4’ (Nick Zangwell) for principles of art and nature?
- Art appreciation: Both formal and contextual art properties
- Nature appreciation: Both/only formal for organic and inorganic nature respectively
^Organic nature has purpose so needs to be considered differently to inorganic
What is Option 4 aka?
Moderate formalism
Who challenges the Normative thesis (of option 3 mostly) and how?
Nick Zangwell:
Don’t need to know anything to appreciate a sunset
Outline a dialogue for the normative thesis in nature
+ Even in nature, no set category (eg Whales = cumbersome fish but elegant mammals)
- But normative doesn’t hold for nature, relativism for nature
+ Biological categories more well established than art categories
