FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4322752272> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4322752272 abstract "Article Summary The resumption of serious and sustained analysis of the concept of aesthetic value in the twentieth century which was described in Section 5 of the article ‘Beauty’ in the 1998 edition of the Encyclopedia (hereafter ‘Beauty1998§5’) broke new ground but failed to solve the problems that stand in the way of a credibly unified theory. For instance, Guy Sircello provides a keen analysis of beauty-making properties, which he takes to be ‘properties of qualitative degree’ (‘PQDs’) such as the vividness or softness of colour, the brilliance or harshness of sound, the melancholy or joviality of a mood. These admit of no quantitative analysis and range over a wide swath of domains. They are not in themselves positively or negatively value-laden, which is essential to avoid circularity. Their aesthetic value is determined by their being intense, non-defective, and non-defective seeming on a nonaesthetic basis (again, to avoid circularity). By intensity is meant that the PQD exists to a high degree. Thus the seeming suede-softness of hills as seen from a distance in a certain light is intensely suede-soft. In a different context the softness might be drab. But he finds little to tell us about the ontological and epistemological standing of these properties or about the rank properly assigned to the overall value of the complex ensembles of properties of a thing. A second standout is the reflection of Kendall Walton (see Walton, K. (1939–)) on what we can call secondary appreciation aroused by awe or wonder at the capacity of things to elicit pleasurable admiration even when they have little claim to direct aesthetic appeal but impress us for their practical, moral, intellectual, or natural value, or for their radically avant-garde strangeness. The virtue of this is to expand the reach of aesthetic admiration beyond traditional limits without losing connection with more paradigmatic beauties. But it raises deep questions about how far we should extend our vision of aesthetic appreciation and how to understand the ontology and epistemology of beauty. What criterion of accuracy will apply to wonder and awe? (Aside from that question there is an important connection between it and aesthetic evaluation. Awe heightens a person’s disinterestedness: ‘Awe basically shuts down self-interest and self-representation and the nagging voice of the self,’ said Dacher Keltner, a professor of psychology at the University of California, Berkeley, ‘two- to three-minute “micro awe” experiences (like gazing at a reflection on the water or visiting a nostalgic playground). … Both can have a profound impact on one’s quality of life.’ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/05/well/live/awe-microadventure-exploration.html?action=click&module=Editors%20Picks&pgtype=Homepage). If we scan the scene of philosophical aesthetics honestly, we can hardly fail to be impressed by how much disarray it presents, ranging from presumption to disinclination to take a position. Consider the presumption of Mary Mothersill’s claim that the aesthetic properties of a work depend on literally every feature being what it is. This is certainly not true for the wavelike contour she cites in El Greco’s Burial of Count Orgaz. Much detail could be altered without affecting that contour. If this were not so then all changes in the work, even its aging, would affect the aesthetic properties we confidently ascribe to it. The opposite of presumption is evasion, as when philosophers refuse to engage with the issue of how aesthetic value can be a single species of evaluation, doubtless wide but still possessed of unity. A case can also be made for the evasiveness saturating the prevalence of studies of what a historical philosopher may or may not have meant in this or that work, rather than direct confrontation with the central theoretical issues. The conclusion one comes to is that philosophical aesthetics is at present a strikingly undercultivated domain. We have much work to do. At the same time our aesthetic commerce with the things that move us (positively or negatively) is a source of major satisfaction. That is a deeply important truism. The oddity is that our passion does not come with deep understanding. It is to this mismatch that the best twenty-first century contributors are devoting themselves. To their contributions we now turn." @default.
• W4322752272 created "2023-03-03" @default.
• W4322752272 creator A5079267257 @default.
• W4322752272 date "2021-10-31" @default.
• W4322752272 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W4322752272 title "Beauty" @default.
• W4322752272 doi "https://doi.org/10.4324/9780415249126-m014-3" @default.
• W4322752272 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W4322752272 type Work @default.
• W4322752272 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4322752272 crossrefType "book-chapter" @default.
• W4322752272 hasAuthorship W4322752272A5079267257 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C122980154 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C2776291640 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C2779343474 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C2780573756 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C2780620123 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C105795698 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C107038049 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C111472728 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C122980154 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C138885662 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C142362112 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C166957645 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C2776291640 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C2779343474 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C2780573756 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C2780620123 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C33923547 @default.
• W4322752272 hasConceptScore W4322752272C95457728 @default.
• W4322752272 hasLocation W43227522721 @default.
• W4322752272 hasOpenAccess W4322752272 @default.
• W4322752272 hasPrimaryLocation W43227522721 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W2059972795 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W2258936263 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W2347645991 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W2352955534 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W2357557338 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W2381500722 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W2386718279 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W2388413478 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W3130265251 @default.
• W4322752272 hasRelatedWork W169266040 @default.
• W4322752272 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4322752272 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4322752272 workType "book-chapter" @default.