The Science of Art Is as Relevant to the Philosophy of Art as Artistic Representations Are to Science: A Reply to Roger Seamon

American Society for Aesthetics Newsletter 31 (3):4-5 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,164

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The conceptual dimension in art and the modern theory of artistic value.Roger Seamon - 2001 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 59 (2):139–151.
How Can Philosophy Be a True Cognitive Science Discipline?William Bechtel - 2010 - Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (3):357-366.
Why Poe? Why not Peirce?Roger Seamon - 2005 - Philosophy and Literature 29 (2):256-268.
Literary Criticism, an Autopsy (review).Roger Seamon - 1998 - Philosophy and Literature 22 (2):523-526.
Guided rapid unconscious reconfiguration in poetry and art.Roger Seamon - 1996 - Philosophy and Literature 20 (2):412-427.
HP Rickman, Philosophy in Literature Reviewed by.Roger Seamon - 1998 - Philosophy in Review 18 (2):147-147.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-05-31

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

William Seeley
University of Southern Maine

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references