1 Ziff is quoting the definition of sociobiology from Wilson, E.O. On Human Nature (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1978) 16Google ScholarPubMed.

2 I have also discussed this article in ‘Nature and Positive Aesthetics,’ Environmental Ethics 6 (1984) 5-34.

3 Ziff, Paul ‘Reasons in Art Criticism,’ in Scheffler, I. ed., Philosophy and Education (Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon 1958)Google Scholar. The article is reprinted in Ziff, Paul Philosophical Turnings: Essays in Conceptual Appreciation (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press 1966) 47–74Google Scholar, to which the page reference given here refers. Comparison of the articles in Antiaesthetics with those in Philosophcal Turnings is in general very interesting.

4 Ziff, ‘Reasons in Art Criticism,’ 71Google Scholar

5 Dickie, George ‘The Myth of the Aesthetic Attitude,’ American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (1964)Google Scholar. The article is reprinted in Hospers, John ed., Introductory Readings in Aesthetics (New York: The Free Press 1969) 28–44Google Scholar, to which the page references given here refer.

6 Dickie, George Art and the Aesthetic: An Institutional Analysis (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press 1974), 40Google Scholar

7 Dickie, ‘The Myth of the Aesthetic Attitude,’ 37Google Scholar

8 Carlson, Allen ‘Environmental Aesthetics and the Dilemma of Aesthetic Education,’ The Journal of Aesthetic Education 10 (1976) 69–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a related line of argument, see Carlson, Allen ‘Nature, Aesthetic Judgment, and Objectivity,’ The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 40 (1981) 15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Dickie, ‘The Myth of the Aesthetic Attitude,’ 41Google Scholar