Contemporary Evolutionary Aesthetics: The View from the Humanities (and Humanists)

Aaron Kozbelt

doi:10.26613/esic.1.2.51

Artikel

Contemporary Evolutionary Aesthetics: The View from the Humanities (and Humanists)

Aaron Kozbelt

Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 1. Oktober 2017

Veröffentlicht von

Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Informationen für Autor*innen

Aus der Zeitschrift Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture Band 1 Heft 2

Abstract

In this article, I assess the current state of evolutionary aesthetics by reviewing four recent books by scholars in art history, literary studies, and psychology. Each book is humanistic in a broad sense. They all address evolutionary themes and share a commitment to understanding aesthetic experience via methodological pluralism, but they differ substantially in perspective and tone. That of Cupchik, a psychologist, expansively discusses the aesthetics of emotion. That of Rampley, an art historian, is the most polemical, with a strong critique of the encroachment of biology into questions of cultural history. Those of Hogan and Aldama, both literary scholars, deal primarily with literature and are the most personal and ultimately the most thought-provoking. The collective humanistic perspective is a departure from more neuroscience-intensive recent volumes, and it highlights the importance of themes like the emergence of aesthetics from the interaction between nature and culture—potentially in different ways at different times throughout the phylogenetic history of our species.

Keywords: evolutionary aesthetics; neuroaesthetics; evolution; aesthetic cognition; art appreciation; literary studies; emotion; two cultures

Works Cited

Chatterjee, Anjan. 2014. The Aesthetic Brain: How We Evolved to Desire Beauty and Enjoy Art. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199811809.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Darwin, Charles. 1859. On the Origin of Species. London: John Murray.Suche in Google Scholar

Darwin, Charles. 1871. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray.10.5962/bhl.title.24784Suche in Google Scholar

Dawkins, Richard. 2006. The God Delusion. New York: Bantam.Suche in Google Scholar

Dissanayake, Ellen. 2000. Art and Intimacy: How the Arts Began. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von (1790) 1988. “The Metamorphosis of Plants.” In Goethe: Scientific Studies, ed. and trans. Douglas Miller, 76–97. New York: Suhrkamp.Suche in Google Scholar

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von (1809) 1962. Faust. Translated by Walter Kauffman. New York: Anchor.Suche in Google Scholar

Goren-Inbar, Naama, and Peltz, S.1995. “Additional Remarks on the Berekhat Ram Figurine.”Rock Art Research12:131–32.Suche in Google Scholar

Gould, Stephen J.1993. Eight Little Piggies. London: Jonathan Cape.Suche in Google Scholar

Gould, Stephen J., and Lewontin, Richard C.1979. “The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme.”Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences205 (1161): 581–98.Suche in Google Scholar

Hugo, Victor. (1864) 1899. William Shakespeare. Translated by Melville B. Anderson. Chicago: A. C. McClurg and Company.Suche in Google Scholar

Kozbelt, Aaron. 2009. “The Evolution of Evolvability, Applied to Human Creativity.”International Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving19 (1): 101–21.Suche in Google Scholar

Kozbelt, Aaron. 2011. “Neuroaesthetics: Where Things Stand Now.”The Evolutionary Review2:137–46.Suche in Google Scholar

Kozbelt, Aaron. 2017. “Neuroaesthetics: The State of the Domain in 2017.”Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture1 (1).10.26613/esic.1.1.25Suche in Google Scholar

Lauring, Jon O. (ed.). 2014. An Introduction to Neuroaesthetics. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Lewis-Williams, David. 2002. The Mind in the Cave: Consciousness and the Origin of Art. London: Thames and Hudson.Suche in Google Scholar

Luhmann, Niklas. 2000. Art as a Social System. Translated by Eva Knodt. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Mithen, Stephen. 1996. The Prehistory of the Mind: The Cognitive Origins of Art and Science. London: Thames and Hudson.Suche in Google Scholar

Morin, Olivier. 2013. “How Portraits Turned Their Eyes upon Us: Visual Preferences and Demographic Change in Cultural Evolution.”Evolution and Human Behavior34:222–29.10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.01.004Suche in Google Scholar

Onians, John. 2008. Neuroarthistory: From Aristotle and Pliny to Baxandall and Zeki. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Pinker, Steven. 2002. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. New York: Penguin.Suche in Google Scholar

Shimamura, Arthur P., and Stephen E. Palmer (eds.). 2012. Aesthetic Science: Connecting Minds, Brains, and Experience. New York: Oxford University Press10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199732142.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Starr, G. Gabrielle. 1959. The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Starr, G. Gabrielle. 2013. Feeling Beauty: The Neuroscience of Aesthetic Experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262019316.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Vos, Piet G., and Jim M. Troost. 1989. “Ascending and Descending Melodic Intervals: Statistical Findings and Their Perceptual Relevance.”Music Perception6:383–96.10.2307/40285439Suche in Google Scholar

Wilson, Edward O.1998. Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. New York: Vintage.Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2017-10-01

Published in Print: 2017-10-01

Sie haben derzeit keinen Zugang zu diesem Inhalt.

Artikel in diesem Heft

https://doi.org/10.26613/esic.1.2.51

Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel

evolutionary aesthetics; neuroaesthetics; evolution; aesthetic cognition; art appreciation; literary studies; emotion; two cultures