The Arbitrariness of Aesthetic Judgment

Journal of Value Inquiry 55 (4):625-646 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Realists about aesthetic judgment believe something like the following: for an aesthetic judgment of be correct, it must respond to the intrinsic aesthetic properties possessed by the object in question (e.g., Meskin et al., 2013; Kieran 2010). However, Cutting’s (2003) empirical research on aesthetic judgment puts pressure on that position. His work indicates that unconscious considerations extrinsic to an artwork can underpin said judgements. This paper takes Cutting’s conclusion a step further: If philosophers grant that it’s possible to appreciate artwork on the basis of unconscious biases, then we never can be fully confident that our aesthetic judgment is undergirded by the intrinsic aesthetic properties of an artwork. Furthermore, if judgment on the basis of unconscious, external reasons cannot be ruled out, we cannot be confident that our aesthetic judgments are ‘correct’. I argue that Cutting’s research is just the tip of the iceberg regarding the extrinsic, unconscious factors that influence aesthetic judgment. Expectation bias formed via social influence and context greatly influence aesthetic judgments and are unavoidable: we inevitably form expectations based on all kinds of contextual cues independently of any actual exposure to the item in question. Such factors make it terribly difficult to be confident in our aesthetic judgments. Even if there are objective properties that mark out some items as aesthetically superior to others, we cannot be sure that our judgments are responding to those properties.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

Aesthetic Higher-Order Evidence for Subjectivists.Luis Oliveira & Chris Mag Uidhir - 2023 - British Journal of Aesthetics 63 (2):235-249.
The critic of free harmony of faculties.Ali Salmani - 2017 - Metaphysics (University of Isfahan) 9 (23):37-50.
The Aesthetic Experience of Artwork.Mika Suojanen - 2014 - In Kaisa Koivisto, Jani Kukkola, Timo Latomaa & Pirkko Sandelin (eds.), Experience Research IV. Lapland University Press. pp. 57–72.
Kant’s Aesthetic Epistemology: Form and World. [REVIEW]Lara Ostaric - 2008 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (1):pp. 147-148.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-08-06

Downloads
561 (#47,496)

6 months
109 (#50,985)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Sackris
Arapahoe Community College

References found in this work

What do philosophers believe?David Bourget & David J. Chalmers - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 170 (3):465-500.
Categories of Art.Kendall L. Walton - 1970 - Philosophical Review 79 (3):334-367.
Being for Beauty: Aesthetic Agency and Value.Dominic Lopes - 2018 - Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Experimental Philosophy of Aesthetics.Florian Cova, Amanda Garcia & Shen-yi Liao - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (12):927-939.

View all 24 references / Add more references