Citations of work:

Nick Zangwill (2005). In Defence of Extreme Formalism About Inorganic Nature: Reply to Parsons.

Order:
Are we missing citations?

PhilPapers citations & references are currently in beta testing. We expect to add many more in the future.

Meanwhile, you can use our bibliography tool to import references for this or another work.

Or you can directly add citations for the above work:

Search for work by author name and title
Add directly by record ID

  1.  11
    Against Zangwill’s Extreme Formalism About Inorganic Nature.Min Xu & Guifang Deng - 2015 - Philosophia 43 (1):249-257.
    Extreme formalism is a radical and important position in the aesthetics of inorganic nature. Zangwill offers a new formulation of what formal aesthetic properties are, according to which a formal aesthetic property of a thing is an aesthetic property that is determined merely by its appearance properties. An appearance property of a thing is the way it seems if perceived under certain conditions. With the notion of formal aesthetic properties formulated as such, extreme formalism, the claim that all aesthetic properties (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  77
    Aesthetic Appreciation of Nature and Environmentalism.Allen Carlson - 2011 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 69:137-155.
    This article is a response to yuriko saito's "is there a correct aesthetic appreciation of nature?" (jae 18:4) which challenges the position on the aesthetic appreciation of nature that i develop in a series of recent articles. i here consider saito's arguments, concluding that they neither establish the correctness of a wide range of kinds of aesthetic appreciations of nature nor undercut the grounds for the prominence i grant to scientific considerations in such appreciation.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3.  47
    Zangwill, Moderate Formalism, and Another Look at Kant's Aesthetic.Christopher Dowling - 2010 - Kantian Review 15 (2):90-117.
    In recent years Nick Zangwill has gone a long way in championing a moderate aesthetic formalism in an attempt to accommodate those objects that many of us call beautiful despite their lack of any formal beauty. While there is some dispute in the literature about the extent to which Kant can be interpreted as an aesthetic formalist, the appeal of his famous distinction between free and dependent beauty should present a fairly natural ally for Zangwill's project. Indeed, such an alliance (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark