Graduate studies at Western
Environmental Ethics 29 (2):151-169 (2007)
|Abstract||Although recent work in philosophical aesthetics has brought welcome attention to the beauty of nature, the aesthetic appreciation of animals remains rarely discussed. The existence of this gap in aesthetic theory can be traced to certain ethical difficulties with aesthetically appreciating animals. These difficulties can be avoided by focusing on the aesthetic quality of “looking fit for function.” This approach to animal beauty can be defended against the view that “looking fit” is a non-aesthetic quality and against Edmund Burke’s famous critique of the connection between fitness and the beauty of animals|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Stephen Davies (2006). Aesthetic Judgements, Artworks and Functional Beauty. Philosophical Quarterly 56 (223):224-241.
Nick Zangwill (2003). Beauty. In Jerrold Levinson (ed.), Oxford Companion to Aesthetics. Oxford University Press.
Ned Hettinger (2010). Animal Beauty, Ethics, and Environmental Preservation. Environmental Ethics 32 (2):115-134.
Stephen Davies (2010). Functional Beauty Examined. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 40 (2):315-332.
Aaron Meskin (2004). Aesthetic Testimony: What Can We Learn From Others About Beauty and Art? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 69 (1):65–91.
Glenn Parsons (2008). Functional Beauty. Oxford University Press.
Andrea Sauchelli (2012). Functional Beauty, Architecture, and Morality: A Beautiful Konzentrationslager? Philosophical Quarterly 62 (246):128-147.
Cain S. Todd (2008). Unmasking the Truth Beneath the Beauty: Why the Supposed Aesthetic Judgements Made in Science May Not Be Aesthetic at All. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (1):61 – 79.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #142,523 of 739,163 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,163 )
How can I increase my downloads?