British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (2):169-183 (2007)
|Abstract||l Carroll, that there is no reason to think that an aesthetic theory of art cannot do justice to art in its relation to the extra-artistic world. My argument depends on a reinterpretation of the aesthetic theory of Francis Hutcheson, according to which Hutcheson does not hold aesthetic perception to be non-epistemic, as Peter Kivy has maintained.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Arnold Berleant (2005). Aesthetics and Environment: Variations on a Theme. Ashgate Pub. Ltd..
Pje Kail (2000). Function and Normativity in Hutcheson's Aesthetic Epistemology. British Journal of Aesthetics 40 (4):441-451.
Emily Michael (1984). Francis Hutcheson on Aesthetic Perception and Aesthetic Pleasure. British Journal of Aesthetics 24 (3):241-255.
Peter Kivy (2007). The Perception of Beauty in Hutcheson's First Inquiry: A Response To James Shelley. British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (4):416-431.
Harold Osborne (1972). Aesthetics. London,Oxford University Press.
Gary Iseminger (2004). The Aesthetic Function of Art. Cornell University Press.
Keith Lehrer (2012). Art, Self, and Knowledge. Oxford University Press.
Peter Kivy (2003). The Seventh Sense: Francis Hutcheson and Eighteenth-Century British Aesthetics. Oxford University Press.
Noël Carroll (2004). Non-Perceptual Aesthetic Properties: Comments for James Shelley. British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (4):413-423.
Paul Crowther (2007). Defining Art, Creating the Canon: Artistic Value in an Era of Doubt. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads21 ( #65,267 of 722,698 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,006 of 722,698 )
How can I increase my downloads?