Aesthetic Implications of the New Paradigm in Ecology
Journal of Aesthetic Education 42 (1):63-79 (2008)
| Abstract | Here I explore the aesthetic implications of this new paradigm, the central implication being that scientific cognitivism, when combined with the new paradigm in ecology, may require updating the qualities associated with positive aesthetics. After reviewing Allen Carlson's defense of both scientific cognitivism and the positive aesthetics thesis, I show how the significantly different conceptual framework that the new paradigm in ecology provides will require equally significant adjustments to how we aesthetically appreciate nature. I make two suggestions. First, the new paradigm in ecology suggests that aesthetic appreciation should focus on natural processes, which will require a more theoretical approach to aesthetic appreciation. Second, because the new paradigm appeals to aesthetic qualities such as imbalance, disorder, and disharmony to make the natural world intelligible, these qualities are consistent with an updated positive aesthetics thesis and should therefore replace the qualities associated with the old paradigm. Collectively, these two suggestions imply that the beauty of nature is dynamic and chaotic rather than stable and orderly. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,701 |
| External links | This entry has no external links. Add one. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJason Boaz Simus (2008). Aesthetic Implications of the New Paradigm in Ecology. Journal of Aesthetic Education 42 (1).
Glenn Parsons (2002). Nature Appreciation, Science, and Positive Aesthetics. British Journal of Aesthetics 42 (3):279-295.
Allen Carlson (1984). Nature and Positive Aesthetics. Environmental Ethics 6 (1):5-34.
Tae-Seung Lim (forthcoming). Observance of Forms: An Aesthetic Analysis of Analects 6.25. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy.
Malcolm Budd (1996). The Aesthetic Appreciation of Nature. British Journal of Aesthetics 36 (3):207-222.
J. Robert Loftis (2003). Three Problems for the Aesthetic Foundations of Environmental Ethics. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 10 (2):41-50.
R. Paden, L. K. Harmon & C. R. Milling (2012). Ecology, Evolution, and Aesthetics: Towards an Evolutionary Aesthetics of Nature. British Journal of Aesthetics 52 (2):123-139.
Ned Hettinger (2005). Allen Carlson's Environmental Aesthetics and the Protection of the Environment. Environmental Ethics 27 (1):57-76.
Ned Hettinger (2005). Allen Carlson's Environmental Aesthetics and the Protection of the Environment. Environmental Ethics 27 (1):57-76.
Jason Simus (2008). Environmental Art and Ecological Citizenship. Environmental Ethics 30 (1):21-36.
Malcom Budd (2000). The Aesthetics of Nature. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (2):137–157.
Frank Sibley (2001). Approach to Aesthetics: Collected Papers on Philosophical Aesthetics. Oxford University Press.
Malcolm Budd (2008). Aesthetic Essays. Oxford University Press.
B. R. Tilghman (2004). Reflections on Aesthetic Judgement. British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (3):248-260.
Allen Carlson (2009). Nature and Landscape: An Introduction to Environmental Aesthetics. Columbia University Press.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2012-09-29Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
