Aesthetic appreciation of the natural environment

The difference and similarity between artistic and natural beauty has been a much-debated topic amongst aestheticians. Allen Carlson – a leading scholar in environmental aesthetics since the late 1970s – claims that we should not appreciate natural beauty in terms of artistic beauty. For Carlson, appreciating “nature as nature” is fundamental. In my eyes, it is hard to deny that nature should be appreciated as nature. However, it is also true that influences from our aesthetic appreciation of artworks should be taken into account when it comes to appreciating the natural environment. To support this argument, I will show that the expression “as beautiful as an artwork!” does not run against the fundamental of “nature as nature” when applied to natural beauty. 芸術美と自然美の差異は、美学者のあいだでも多く議論される話題のひとつである。1970年代より環境美学を牽引してきたアレン・カールソンは、自然美を芸術美の規範で以て鑑賞するべきではないと主張する。かれにとって、「自然を自然として」鑑賞することが根本的に重要なことがらである。本稿もまた、自然を自然として鑑賞するという要請そのものを否定することはしない。しかし、自然環境の鑑賞について考える際、芸術作品の美的鑑賞からの影響もまた数え入れられるべきだということもひとつの事実である。このことを示すために、本稿では「芸術作品のように美しい！」という表現は、「自然を自然として」という基礎的な要請に反するものではないことを明らかにする。 This article is in Japanese.

Download Full-text

Random isn't real: How the patchy distribution of ecological rewards may generate “incentive hope”

Behavioral and Brain Sciences ◽

10.1017/s0140525x18002005 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 42 ◽

Author(s):

Laurel Symes ◽

Thalia Wheatley

Keyword(s):

Natural Environment ◽

Random Distribution ◽

Spatiotemporal Distribution ◽

Patchy Distribution ◽

Distribution Of Resources

AbstractAnselme & Güntürkün generate exciting new insights by integrating two disparate fields to explain why uncertain rewards produce strong motivational effects. Their conclusions are developed in a framework that assumes a random distribution of resources, uncommon in the natural environment. We argue that, by considering a realistically clumped spatiotemporal distribution of resources, their conclusions will be stronger and more complete.

Download Full-text

Extreme self-sacrifice beyond fusion: Moral expansiveness and the special case of allyship

Behavioral and Brain Sciences ◽

10.1017/s0140525x18001620 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 41 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Daniel Crimston ◽

Matthew J. Hornsey

Keyword(s):

General Theory ◽

Biological Markers ◽

Natural Environment ◽

Relevant Dimension ◽

Special Case

AbstractAs a general theory of extreme self-sacrifice, Whitehouse's article misses one relevant dimension: people's willingness to fight and die in support of entities not bound by biological markers or ancestral kinship (allyship). We discuss research on moral expansiveness, which highlights individuals’ capacity to self-sacrifice for targets that lie outside traditional in-group markers, including racial out-groups, animals, and the natural environment.

Download Full-text