Response to Ramachandran and Hirstein

Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (6-7):6-7 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

[opening paragraph]: Ramachandran and Hirstein in their article, ‘The Science of Art: A Neurological Theory of Aesthetic Experience’ make the grandiose claim of having developed a theory of human aesthetic experience, while reducing that very experience to meaningless terms. As a practising artist whose work is informed by contemporary theory as well as a Buddhist practice, I find it hard to take their argument seriously. Clearly, it is necessary to examine one's assumptions about the nature of the artistic experience before attempting to develop grand theory

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

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

Three Laws of Qualia.V. S. Ramachandran & William Hirstein - 1999 - In Jonathan Shear & Shaun Gallagher (eds.), Models of the Self. Imprint Academic. pp. 83.
Ramachandran's four counterexamples.Paul Noordhof - 2000 - Mind 109 (434):315-324.
Synaesthesia in phantom Limbs induced with mirrors.Vilayanur S. Ramachandran & Diane Rogers-Ramachandran - 1996 - Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 263:377-386.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-02-14

Downloads
16 (#880,136)

6 months
3 (#1,023,809)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references