Linked bibliography for the SEP article "Aesthetic Judgment" by Nick Zangwill
- Beardsley, Monroe, 1958. Aesthetics, Indianapolis: Hackett.
- An extraordinary work, staggering in scope, deploying the notion of the aesthetic. The target of Dickie's critique. (Scholar)
- Beardsley, Monroe, 1982. The Aesthetic Point of View, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
- A selection of Beardsley's essays. (Scholar)
- Blackburn, Simon, 1998. Ruling Passions, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- A defense of expressivism, a modern version of Hume's sentimentalism. (Scholar)
- Budd, Malcolm, 2001. “The Pure Judgement of Taste as an Aesthetic Reflective Judgement,” British Journal of Aesthetics, 41: 247–260.
- Refreshingly less deferential than many writings on Kant. (Scholar)
- Burton, Stephan, 1992. “Thick Concepts Revised,” Analysis, 52: 28–32.
- An insightful account of substantive aesthetic descriptions, and also of so-called “thick moral concepts”. (Scholar)
- Cohen, Ted, 1973. “A Critique of Sibley's Position,”
Theoria, 39: 113–152.
- Argues that Sibley's account of what makes concepts aesthetic will not do. (Scholar)
- Dickie, George, 1965. “Beardsley's Phantom Aesthetic Experience,” Journal of Philosophy, 62: 129–136.
- Argues that Beardsley's account of aesthetic experience will not do. (Scholar)
- Davidson, Donald, 1980. “Mental Events,” in Essays on Actions and Events, Blackwell: Oxford.
- A classic paper in the philosophy of mind arguing for a version of materialism without strict laws relating the mental and the physical. (Scholar)
- Fine, Kit, 1994. “Essence and Modality,” Philosophical Perspectives, 8: 1–16.
- Distinguishes essence from modality; of general philosophical importance. (Scholar)
- Hume, David, 1757. “Of the Standard of Taste,” page reference is to reprint in Essays: Moral, Political and Literary, Eugene Miller (ed.), Indianapolis: Liberty, 1985.
- Hume's classic attempt to reconcile sentimentalism with normativity. (Scholar)
- Kant, Immanuel, 1790. Critique of Judgment, page reference to trans. Meredith, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1928.
- Includes the idea that judgments of beauty and ugliness are subjectively universal, and much else. (Scholar)
- Kivy, Peter, 1975. “What Makes ‘Aesthetic’ Terms
Aesthetic?,” Philosophy and Phenomenological
Research, 36: 197–211.
- Argues that Sibley's unitary notion of the aesthetic has no basis. Kivy also makes a positive suggestion. (Scholar)
- Mothersill, Mary, 1984. Beauty Restored, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- An exploration of the notion of beauty, with some historical coverage. (Scholar)
- Scruton, Roger, 1974. Art and Imagination, London: Methuen.
- A wide-ranging book, in which the role of imagination is highlighted. (Scholar)
- Scruton, Roger, 1979. The Aesthetics of Architecture,
- A superb discussion of architecture, but also contains much material relevant to more central topics in aesthetics. (Scholar)
- Sibley, Frank, 1959. “Aesthetic Concepts,” Philosophical Review, 68: 421–450; reprinted in Approach to Aesthetics, Clarendon: Oxford, 2001.
- Sibley's classic paper, which makes the notion of the aesthetic central. The target of Cohen and Kivy's critiques. (Scholar)
- Sibley, Frank, 1965. “Aesthetic and Nonaesthetic,” Philosophical Review, 74: 135–159; reprinted in Approach to Aesthetics, Clarendon: Oxford, 2001.
- Explores the dependence of aesthetic features on nonaesthetic features. This paper was originally the second part of Sibley's paper “Aesthetic Concepts”. (Scholar)
- Zangwill, Nick, 1995. “The Beautiful, the Dainty and the Dumpy,” British Journal of Aesthetics, 35: 317–329; reprinted slightly modified in The Metaphysics of Beauty, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001.
- Includes a statement and defense of the centrality of beauty and ugliness among other aesthetic concepts. (Scholar)
- Zangwill, Nick, 1999. “Feasible Aesthetic Formalism,” Noûs, 33: 610–629; reprinted in The Metaphysics of Beauty, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001.
- Argues for a “moderate” formalist view that allows that things can be “dependently beautiful,” in Kant's sense. (Scholar)
- Zemach, Eddy, 1995. Real Beauty, University Park: Penn State Press.
- Argues for an extreme realist view. (Scholar)
- Bender, John, 1995. “General but Defeasible Reasons in Aesthetic Evaluation: The Generalist/Particularist Dispute,” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 53: 379–392. (Scholar)
- Dickie, George, 1988. Evaluating Art, Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (Scholar)
- Goldman, Alan, 1995. Aesthetic Value, Boulder, Colorado: Westview. (Scholar)
- Greenberg, Clement, 1999. Homemade Esthetics, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- Hanslick, Eduard, 1854. On the Musically Beautiful, Indianapolis: Hackett, 1986. (Scholar)
- Kivy, Peter, 1968. “Aesthetic Aspects and Aesthetic Qualities,” Journal of Philosophy, 65: 85–93. (Scholar)
- Levinson, Jerrold, 1995. “Pleasure and the Value of Works of Art,” in The Pleasures of Aesthetics, Ithaca: Cornell University Press. (Scholar)
- Levinson, Jerrold, 2001. “Aesthetic Properties, Evaluative Force, and Differences of Sensibility,” Aesthetic Concepts: Essays After Sibley, E. Brady and J. Levinson (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
- McCloskey, Mary, 1987. Kant's Aesthetic, New York: SUNY Press. (Scholar)
- Plato. Hippias Major.
- Saito, Yuriko, 2001. “Everyday Aesthetics,” Philosophy and Literature, 25: 87–95. See also her book Everyday Aesthetics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. (Scholar)
- Scruton, Roger, 1983. “Understanding Music,” in The Aesthetic Understanding, London: Carcanet. (Scholar)
Generated Sun Dec 8 05:06:22 2013