David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
This is a more detailed version of my "On 'Cuteness'", which appeared in the British Journal of Aesthetics in April 1992. For John Morreall, cuteness is an abstract general attribute of infants that causes adults to want to care for them (or which is the reason, or at least important reason, for such solicitousness). I shall try to show, in what follows, that this is, if not an altogether fallacious way of explaining the matter, at least an extremely misleading one. As it stands, in particular, it is too easy to infer from Morreall's line of reasoning 1) that infants in general might conceivably never have developed cuteness, and 2) that infants, because of this deficiency, would then not be cared for as adequately by their parents. An equally wrong further implication, which further helps to express my difficulty with Morreall's formulation of the matter, would be that if baby spiders (for example) had happened to have the abstract general characteristic called 'cuteness', while human children did not have it, then human adults would have been more inclined to care for baby spiders than for baby humans. It is to avoid such oddities as these that, it seems to me, a further consideration of the problem is warranted.
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
John T. Sanders (1992). On ‘Cuteness’. British Journal of Aesthetics 32 (2):162-165.
Gary D. Sherman & Jonathan Haidt (2011). Cuteness and Disgust: The Humanizing and Dehumanizing Effects of Emotion. Emotion Review 3 (3):245-251.
John Morreall (1993). The Contingency of Cuteness: A Reply to Sanders. British Journal of Aesthetics 33 (3):283-285.
John Morreall (1991). Cuteness. British Journal of Aesthetics 31 (1):39-47.
Sianne Ngai (2012). Our Aesthetic Categories: Zany, Cute, Interesting. Harvard University Press.
Paul E. Meehl (1967). Theory-Testing in Psychology and Physics: A Methodological Paradox. Philosophy of Science 34 (2):103-115.
John S. Morreall (1977). Aldrich and Aesthetic Perception. British Journal of Aesthetics 17 (3):275-280.
Stephan Verschoor & Szilvia Biro (2011). Primacy of Information About Means Selection Over Outcome Selection in Goal Attribution by Infants. Cognitive Science 36 (4):714-725.
Loretta M. Kopelman (2005). Rejecting the Baby Doe Rules and Defending a "Negative" Analysis of the Best Interests Standard. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (4):331 – 352.
Alison Shaw (2012). 'They Say Islam has a Solution for Everything, so Why Are There No Guidelines for This?' Ethical Dilemmas Associated with the Births and Deaths of Infants with Fatal Abnormalities From a Small Sample of Pakistani Muslim Couples in Britain. Bioethics 26 (9):485-492.
M. Matthen (1999). Evolution, Wisconsin Style: Selection and the Explanation of Individual Traits. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (1):143-150.
Bence Nanay (2001). A More Pluralist Typology of Selection Processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):547-548.
Added to index2012-10-11
Total downloads72 ( #15,372 of 1,004,651 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #8,175 of 1,004,651 )
How can I increase my downloads?