The excellent quality and depth of the various essays make [the book] an invaluable resource....It is likely to become essential reading in its field.—CHOICE.

To find more information on Rowman & Littlefield titles, please visit us at www.rowmanlittlefield.com.

1. Thesis: My contention is that critics can give inductive reasons in support of their evaluative judgments of art, even though making such judgments is neither the only nor the major function of a critic, even though not all evaluations which are made are such that they can be supported inductively, and even though those judgments which can be supported inductively can be understood as inductively supportable only from a philosophic perspective often rejected by the very critics who make the (...) judgments. I further argue that this rejection of inductive reasoning in criticism—and the subsequent search for new ‘logics’ of imperatives, performatives, and attitudes—is due primarily to a fundamental failure to examine the metaphysical presuppositions of judgment; more specifically, it can be shown that from the common rejection by most contemporary Anglo-American philosophers of certain metaphysical propositions, it is possible to deduce a model which displays the grounds for an inductive interpretation of critical reasoning. (shrink)

These are the questions that Gary H. Stahl addresses in this original and provocative work.