Review of Metaphysics 21 (2):376-376 (1967)

The title of this work is a somewhat saucy overstatement of its thesis—that perceivers seek in works of art experiences of "discontinuity" and "disorientation," as a kind of "rehearsal" for "real life" situations in which they must negotiate intellectual tensions, resulting from a disparity between what they expect and what actually happens. Art-perceiving, the author asserts, is a "biological, adaptive" mechanism characteristic of the human organism. Peckham, like most thoughtful readers of art history, is irritated by the preposterous assertions that man's perceptions are a mad, disorderly blizzard of phenomena, and the artist alone can bring "order" to the mess. Of course, it is obvious that neither of these notions is very sensible, but the unfortunate truth about the lay psychology of most criticism is that Dr. Peckham's assertions in this connection will probably be regarded as controversial in many departments of literature and fine arts. The author is at his best when barbedly [[sic]] criticizing his colleagues; he is at less than his best, however, when he assumes the mantle of philosophical psychology in order to bring authority to his arguments. Intent upon finding confirmation in both the fashionable and passe schools of behavioral science and philosophy, he masses gluts of aphorisms from Gestalt psychology, Husserl, Heidegger, Susanne Langer, and Paul Ziff (the last pair being very indiscreetly aligned to form notions which are no less intuitive than those of the various art-historians he is admonishing. In the area of psychology, Peckham ignores all of the current approaches, and in the area of philosophy he refers to linguistic analysis or philosophy of science as though each were substantively and methodologically unified, and possessed clear-cut views about the universe. Peckham's central thesis, moreover, leaves one unable to distinguish a work of creative physics from a novel.—E. H. W.
Keywords Catholic Tradition  Contemporary Philosophy  General Interest
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0034-6632
DOI revmetaph1967212291
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,508
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Man's Rage for Chaos.Morse Peckham - 1965 - Philadelphia: Chilton Books.
Defining Chaos.Robert W. Batterman - 1993 - Philosophy of Science 60 (1):43-66.
Man's Rage for Chaos: Biology, Behavior, and the Arts.E. H. W. - 1967 - Review of Metaphysics 21 (2):376-376.
Chaos and Order in the World of the Psyche. [REVIEW]William Roweton - 1993 - Journal of Mind and Behavior 14 (4):399-400.
Nonseparability and Quantum Chaos.Fred Kronz - 1998 - Philosophy of Science 65 (1):50-75.
""Louis Pasteur and" le Rage"--100 Years Ago.H. Malkin - 1985 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 30 (1):40-46.
Chaos in Game Dynamics.Brian Skyrms - 1992 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 1 (2):111-130.
A Rahnerian Reading of Black Rage.Carmichael Peters - 2003 - Philosophy and Theology 15 (1):191-215.
Has Chaos Been Explained?Jeffrey Koperski - 2001 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (4):683-700.


Added to PP index

Total views
17 ( #558,728 of 2,330,883 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #256,394 of 2,330,883 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes