Questioning the necessity of the aesthetic modes

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (2):160 - 161 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I question both the necessity and the sufficiency of Bullot & Reber's (B&R's) aesthetic modes. I argue that they have not shown how the aesthetic modes are truly – how they concern our experience of artworks as opposed to other kinds of experiences or why the modes are individually necessary for one. I suggest the causal dependence of the modes should be modified

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,045

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

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-27

Downloads
23 (#672,572)

6 months
9 (#436,380)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Katherine Tullmann
Northern Arizona University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Transfiguration of the Commonplace, a Philosophy of Art.Marcia M. Eaton - 1981 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 40 (2):206-208.
Danto and His Critics.Mark Rollins (ed.) - 1993 - Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Add more references