In Defense of Sentimentality

In In defense of sentimentality. New York: Oxford University Press (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Too often, since the 19th century, sensitivity is dismissed as mere “sentimentality” in philosophy and in literature. It is charged that sentimentality is distorting, self-indulgent, self-deceptive. I argue that all of these charges are misplaced or themselves distorted and betray a suspicion of emotions and the tender sentiments that is unwarranted.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,642

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

In Defense of Sentimentality.M. Tanner - 2006 - British Journal of Aesthetics 46 (3):312-313.
In defense of sentimentality.Robert C. Solomon - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press.
In Defense of Sentimentality.Robert C. Solomon - 1990 - Philosophy and Literature 14 (2):304-323.
In Defense of Sentimentality : A Casebook.Robert C. Solomon - 2004 - New York, US: Oxford University Press USA.
Sympathy and Vengeance.Robert C. Solomon - 2004 - In In defense of sentimentality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Comic Relief.Robert C. Solomon - 2004 - In In defense of sentimentality. New York: Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-10-25

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Replies to Garland, Ben-Ze'ev, Timmerman, and Beisecker.Michael Cholbi - 2022 - Journal of Philosophy of Emotion 4 (1):33-47.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references