Getting Practical

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Network Theory ◽  
Mental Representations ◽  
Practical Reasons ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
Aesthetic Appreciation ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Aesthetic Property ◽  
Aesthetic Values ◽  
Aesthetic Reason

While the main argument for the network theory of aesthetic value is that it better explains the facts about aesthetic activity than does aesthetic hedonism, the two theories share some common assumptions. Aesthetic evaluations are mental representations that attribute aesthetic values to items. Aesthetic acts are acts based on aesthetic evaluations. Aesthetic values figure in aesthetic reasons, which are practical reasons. That is, an aesthetic reason lends weight to the proposition that an agent should perform some act—an act of aesthetic appreciation, for example. Hence, one task for a theory of aesthetic value is to state what makes some values aesthetic. A second is to state what makes it the case that an aesthetic property figures in a reason that lends weight to what an agent should do. Aesthetic hedonism and the network theory offer only to explain the practical normativity of aesthetic value.

To Seize upon the Applause of the Heart

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Network Theory ◽  
Practical Reasons ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Theory Of Value ◽  
Aesthetic Values ◽  
Contemporary Account

The main argument for the network theory of aesthetic value is that it better explains the facts about aesthetic activity than does its rival, aesthetic hedonism. Aesthetic hedonism reduces aesthetic values to hedonic values, which naturally figure in practical reasons. That an item offers an agent pleasure is always reason for them to access the pleasure. Most philosophers add that aesthetic values are subject to a standard. On the best contemporary account, the standard is represented by an ideal aesthetic appreciator. An argument is given to explain why the standard represented by an ideal aesthetic appreciator is normative for all aesthetic agents. Finally, aesthetic hedonism befits a desire-based theory of value.

Hundred Mile Aesthetics

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Network Theory ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Psychological Traits ◽  
Aesthetic Practice ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Aesthetic Values

The main argument for the network theory of aesthetic value is that it better explains the facts about aesthetic activity than aesthetic hedonism. According to the network theory, an aesthetic value figures in a fact that lends weight to the proposition that it would be an aesthetic achievement for an agent to act in the context of an aesthetic practice. Each aesthetic practice has its own aesthetic profile, in which determinate aesthetic values are distinctively realized, and each has core aesthetic norms centred on its distinctive aesthetic profile. An account is given of the valence of aesthetic values. The theory explains why aesthetic experts disperse into almost all demographic niches, why they jointly inhabit the whole aesthetic universe, why they specialize by aesthetic domain, why they specialize by type of activity, why they specialize by activity and domain interacts, and why their expertise is rooted in relatively stable psychological traits.

Infrastructures of Aesthetic Agency

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Social Theory ◽  
Network Theory ◽  
Social Practices ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Aesthetic Reason

The main argument for the network theory of aesthetic value is that it better explains the facts about aesthetic activity than does its rival, aesthetic hedonism. According to the network theory, an aesthetic value figures in a fact that lends weight to the proposition that it would be an aesthetic achievement for an agent to act. An aesthetic achievement is an act that succeeds out of aesthetic competence, so an agent has aesthetic reason to act just when they have reason to achieve by so acting. Agents with aesthetic reasons to act have reasons to act in coordination with one another when their coordination raises their chances of achieving. In acting, they rely upon and give rise to social formations. Aesthetic agency is scaffolded by aesthetic practices, which are social practices. A contrast is drawn with structuralist social theory.

Being for Beauty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Constitutive Relation ◽  
Network Theory ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Distinctive Character ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Aesthetic Values ◽  
Shed Light

One question that leads us into aesthetics is: why does beauty matter? Or, what do aesthetic goods bring to my life, to make it a life that goes well? Or, how does beauty deserve the place we have evidently made for it in our lives? A theory of aesthetic value states what beauty is so as to equip us to answer this question. According to aesthetic hedonism, aesthetic values are properties of items that stand in constitutive relation to pleasure. Contemporary versions of aesthetic hedonism don’t explain what makes aesthetic values aesthetic, but they do explain what makes them normative, stating what makes it the case that aesthetic value facts lend weight to what an agent should do, for the fact that acting yields pleasure is always a reason to act. This book introduces and defends an alternative to aesthetic hedonism. According to the network theory, aesthetic value facts lend weight to its being an achievement for an agent to act. Since agents achieve by acting in coordination with one another, the theory takes seriously the sociality of aesthetic activity. The main argument for the network theory is that it better explains six facts about aesthetic activity than does aesthetic hedonism. The book also discusses the relationship between aesthetic value and pleasure, the point and distinctive character of aesthetic discourse, and the metaphysics of aesthetic value. Two final chapters use the network theory to shed light on how aesthetic value matters to us as individuals and as members of collectives.

Beings for Beauty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Network Theory ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Psychological Traits ◽  
Almost All

The main argument for the network theory of aesthetic value is that it better explains the facts about aesthetic activity than does its rival, aesthetic hedonism. Aesthetic activity is not limited to appreciation, and six case studies are presented of aesthetic agents whose expertise covers a range of aesthetic activities. From a survey of the case studies, we see that six facts need explaining. Aesthetic experts disperse into almost all demographic niches, they jointly inhabit the whole aesthetic universe, they specialize by aesthetic domain, they specialize by type of activity, they specialize by activity and domain interact, and their expertise is rooted in relatively stable psychological traits.

By Happy Alchemy of Mind

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Social Context ◽  
Network Theory ◽  
Aesthetic Appreciation ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Art Historians ◽  
Reliable Performance

The network theory of aesthetic value implies that aesthetic value is related only contingently to pleasure (or finally valuable experience). The chapter argues that this result fits the facts about how agents are motivated to act aesthetically: sometimes aesthetic agents act out of non-aesthetic desires. As a result, what makes someone an aesthetic expert is their reliable performance, not any specifically aesthetic desire. At the same time, the exercise of aesthetic competence typically brings pleasure, because the pleasure system is implicated in any kind of competence performance. Some art historians say as much when they describe the details of how aesthetic appreciation works in social context.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Network Theory ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Spillover Effects ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Inherent Value ◽  
Aesthetic Values

Misgivings concerning the value of beauty are widespread. Outside the academy, beauty is often regarded as frivolous, and public support for aesthetic activities is often justified by appeal to their economic and cultural spillover effects, rather than their inherent value. Arts scholars who regard perceptions of beauty as contributing to oppressive social formations have come to emphasize non-aesthetic values in art. Meanwhile, philosophy has been stuck for some time with a consensus that aesthetic values are hedonic values—an item’s aesthetic value is its power to produce finally valuable experiences. The trouble is that aesthetic hedonism plays into misgivings about the value of beauty. A plan is laid out for working towards the network theory of aesthetic value as an alternative to aesthetic hedonism.

Beauty, Naturally

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Network Theory ◽  
Subjective Response ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
The World ◽  
Aesthetic Values

Like aesthetic hedonism, the network theory assumes aesthetic value realism. The chapter argues for aesthetic naturalism without appeal to aesthetic non-cognitivism or aesthetic nihilism. First, aesthetic normativity reduces to achievement normativity. Second, aesthetic value facts are grounded in non-aesthetic facts. Grounding, by contrast with supervenience, provides for metaphysical explanations of the very kind that we seek in order to understand and to manipulate aesthetic value in the world. Many philosophers fret about whether or not aesthetic value facts are subjective (response-constituted). A distinction between what grounds aesthetic value facts and what anchors aesthetic practices makes clear how aesthetic values are anthropocentric, but not response-constituted.

Strength and Warranties of Skill

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Network Theory ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Aesthetic Evaluation

The main argument for the network theory of aesthetic value is that it better explains the facts about aesthetic activity than does its rival, aesthetic hedonism. The network theory states what makes it the case that an aesthetic value is reason-giving: it figures in a fact that lends weight to the proposition that it would be an aesthetic achievement for an agent to act. An aesthetic achievement is an act that succeeds as a result of the exercise of an aesthetic competence seated in the agent. Core aesthetic competence is competence in aesthetic evaluation. Aesthetic meta-competence is competence in selecting opportunities for acting aesthetically. An aesthetic expert is an agent who has competence for aesthetic achievement.

Six Degrees of Separation

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McIver Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Bounded Rationality ◽  
Network Theory ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
Aesthetic Value ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Six Degrees Of Separation

The main argument for the network theory of aesthetic value is that it better explains six facts about aesthetic activity than does its rival, aesthetic hedonism. The chapter indicates why aesthetic hedonism does not predict how aesthetic experts disperse into almost all demographic niches, how they jointly inhabit the whole aesthetic universe, how they specialize by aesthetic domain, how they specialize by type of activity, how they specialize by activity and domain interact, or how their expertise comes to be relatively stable. In addition, the account of the normativity of aesthetic reasons has some revealing flaws. The account has trouble with the plasticity of pleasure, the bounded rationality of aesthetic agents, the importance of aesthetic personality, and the possibility of the alienation of aesthetic reasons from desires.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document