David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 135 (3):375 - 405 (2007)
What is it for a picture to be more realistic, or more depictive, than another? Without committing to any thesis as to what depiction consists in, I show that degrees of depictiveness are grounded in a certain relation between two basic kinds of differences between pictures: configurational differences and content differences. A picture is thus more depictive just in case it is seen as having fewer nondepictive features, whereas a nondepictive feature is individuated through the susceptibility of the picture's configuration to change without entailing any change in the picture's content.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy of Religion Philosophy of Mind Epistemology Logic Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Kendall L. Walton (1990). Mimesis as Make-Believe: On the Foundations of the Representational Arts. Harvard University Press.
Nelson Goodman (1968). Languages of Art. Bobbs-Merrill.
Nelson Goodman (1984). Of Mind and Other Matters. Harvard University Press.
Robert Hopkins (1998). Picture, Image and Experience: A Philosophical Inquiry. Cambridge University Press.
Richard Wollheim (1998). On Pictorial Representation. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 56 (3):217-226.
Citations of this work BETA
Alon Chasid (2014). Visual Experience: Cognitive Penetrability and Indeterminacy. Acta Analytica 29 (1):119-130.
Alon Chasid (2014). Pictorial Experience: Not so Special After All. Philosophical Studies 171 (3):471-491.
Michael Newall (2014). Painting and Philosophy. Philosophy Compass 9 (4):225-237.
Similar books and articles
Gavin McIntosh (2003). Depiction Unexplained: Peacocke and Hopkins on Pictorial Representation. British Journal of Aesthetics 43 (3):279-288.
John Dilworth (2010). Depictive Seeing and Double Content. In Catharine Abell & Katerina Bantinaki (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Picturing. Oxford University Press
Alon Chasid (2004). Why the Pictorial Relation is Not Reference. British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (3):226-247.
Catharine Abell (2007). Pictorial Realism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (1):1 – 17.
John Dilworth (2002). Three Depictive Views Defended. British Journal of Aesthetics 42 (3):259-278.
Dominic Lopes (1995). Pictorial Realism. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 53 (3):277-285.
M. Pettersson (2011). Seeing What Is Not There: Pictorial Experience, Imagination and Non-Localization. British Journal of Aesthetics 51 (3):279-294.
Ben Blumson (2010). Pictures, Perspective and Possibility. Philosophical Studies 149 (2):135 - 151.
Roberto Casati (2010). Hallucinatory Pictures. Acta Analytica 25 (3):365-368.
Sonia Sedivy (1996). Conventional Naturalism: A Perceptualist Account of Pictorial Representation. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 10 (2):103 – 125.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #119,995 of 1,725,989 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #80,670 of 1,725,989 )
How can I increase my downloads?