In defence of extreme formalism about inorganic nature: Reply to Parsons

British Journal of Aesthetics 45 (2):185-191 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I defend extreme formalism about inorganic nature against arguments put forward by Glenn Parsons. I begin by laying out the general issue over aesthetic formalism, and I describe the position of extreme formalism about inorganic nature. I then reconsider -Ronald Hepburn's beach/seabed example. Next I discuss the notions of function in play in our thinking about inorganic nature. And lastly I consider Parsons's flooding river example. I conclude that extreme formalism about inorganic nature is safe from Parsons's arguments.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,475

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
180 (#107,723)

6 months
4 (#783,550)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Nick Zangwill
University College London

Citations of this work

Sensory Force, Sublime Impact, and Beautiful Form.Eli I. Lichtenstein - 2019 - British Journal of Aesthetics 59 (4):449-464.
Aesthetic Appreciation of Nature and Environmentalism.Allen Carlson - 2011 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 69:137-155.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Functional analysis.Robert E. Cummins - 1975 - Journal of Philosophy 72 (November):741-64.
Categories of Art.Kendall L. Walton - 1970 - Philosophical Review 79 (3):334-367.
Formal natural beauty.Nick Zangwill - 2001 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 101 (2):209–224.
On aesthetically appreciating human environments.Allen Carlson - 2001 - Philosophy and Geography 4 (1):9 – 24.

View all 6 references / Add more references