1

An examination of philosophical issues surrounding attempts to naturalize aesthetic experience by integrating research in aesthetics and cognitive science. In this context “naturalizing” refers to attempts to explain aesthetic experiences by reference to the natural psychological processes underlying perception and cognition. The aim of the course is to introduce students to the interdisciplinary field of cognitive science, and to investigate the role psychology and cognitive neuroscience can play in explanations of art and aesthetic experience. The first part of the course introduces issues in aesthetics. The second part examines the role an understanding of the perceptual relationship between viewers and works of visual art can play in an explanation of the aesthetic experiences we associate with art in general. This section investigates the general methodology underlying the interdisciplinary study of aesthetics and cognitive science, and the application of current theories of perception to an understanding of aesthetic experiences.

Course Goals:

1. Provide a general understanding of the objectives and interdisciplinary methods of cognitive science via their application in explanations of art and aesthetic experience.

2. Evaluate how aesthetic experiences are differentiated from ordinary perceptual experiences in traditional and contemporary philosophical literature.

3. Naturalizing aesthetics is an instance of a more general philosophical project. The goal of this project is to investigate, and if possible explain or resolve, traditional philosophical problems in terms natural psychological processes. This course will provide students with the philosophical background to evaluate attempts to naturalize aesthetics.

Requirements:

Students will be required to write two papers: a short paper (6 – 8 pages) on an assigned topic due at the midterm; and a term paper (12 - 14 pages) on a topic of their own choice due at the end of the reading period. Students must see me to discuss the topic of their term papers no later than Session 10.

Texts:

Required texts:

-Zeki, Semir (1999). Inner Vision, Oxford University Press, New York.

-Carroll, Noël (1999). Philosophy of Art, Routledge, New York.

-Course packet available through YaleRIS (http://www.yale.edu/ris/sub_store_bookstore.html).

Additional supplemental texts are on reserve at Cross Campus Library.

The following books provide useful background in aesthetics, cognitive science, and cognitive neuroscience:

Invented Worlds: The Psychology of the Arts, Ellen Winner, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1982.

Image and Brain, Stephen M. Kosslyn, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994.

Visual Agnosia, Martha Farah, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994.

The Cognitive Neuroscience of Vision, Martha J. Farah, Blackwell Publishers, Malden, MA, 2000.

Visual Intelligence: How We Create What We See, Donald D. Hoffman, W. W. Norton and Company, New York, 1998.

Creating Mind, John E. Dowling, W. W. Norton and Company, New York, 1998.

Vision and Design, Roger Fry, Dover Publications Inc., Mineola, NY, 1981.

Beyond Aesthetics, Noël Carroll, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2001.

BACK TO TOP

2. Syllabus and Lecture Overview:

A. Aesthetics and The Constructivist Hypothesis:

Session 1. Introductory Lecture:

The goal of this session is to introduce students to the key concepts and basic model for the interdisciplinary study of cognitive science and aesthetics:

a) the philosophical definition of aesthetics: the study of sensory cognition and the phenomenal character of the experiences associated with artworks.

b) the definition of an interpretation: the application of background art historical and cultural knowledge in the identification of the content of a work of art.

c) a basic philosophical conflict between the role of interpretation and the philosophical definition of aesthetics: it has been argued that what differentiates aesthetic from ordinary perceptual experiences is not their phenomenal content, but rather how viewers interpret them relative to background art historical and cultural knowledge, e.g. conceptual art like the "readymades" of Marcel Duchamp.

d) the definition of a constructivist theory of vision and its implications for the field of aesthetics:

i. expectations and background knowledge concerning the structure and function of scenes and objects play an integral role in the construction of visual appearances;

ii. therefore the conceptual contributions of background art historical and cultural knowledge cannot be so easily separated from the phenomenal content of aesthetic experiences.

e) a solution suggested by a constructivist theory of vision to the conflict between the idea of an interpretation and the philosophical definition of aesthetics: background art historical and cultural knowledge plays a role in the construction of the phenomenal content of aesthetic experiences.

Session 2. Some Background in Aesthetics: Aesthetic Experience and Interpretation:

The goal of this session is to examine in detail: a) the central notion of a theory of aesthetics, i.e. that what individuates artworks from ordinary objects is the unique phenomenal character of aesthetic experiences, and b) a standard objection to theories of aesthetics, i.e. that they cannot adequately account for the role of interpretation in aesthetic experiences.

Session 3. The Fry-Ruskin Thesis:

The Fry-Ruskin Thesis consists of three claims: a) visual artists derive the content of their works from a careful examination of the underlying structure of natural appearances, b) viewers reconstruct the representational content of these works from visual cues derived from this examination, and c) as a result an intuitive understanding of the structure of appearances plays a key role in the production of aesthetic experiences. The goal of this session is to evaluate a) the Fry-Ruskin Thesis as a theory of aesthetics, and b) Gombrich's criticism that it rests on a naïve view of vision built upon the impossible notion of an "innocent," or unbiased, eye.

Session 4. The Constructivist Hypothesis:

The goal of this session is to: a) introduce the idea that the structure of appearances is actively constructed by the visual system, b) introduce a general constructivist model for the study of cognitive science and aesthetics which suggests that artists' close examination of the structure of appearances is in fact a close examination of the way the visual system constructs visual representations, and c) discuss a solution this strategy suggests for the problem of interpretation.

B. Bottom Up Approaches:

Bottom-up approaches to aesthetics and cognitive science fix on the neurophysiological structure of early visual processes. The focus of these theories is on the way artists' exploit shallow visual effects that are the products of these processes.

Session 5. A Bottom-Up Approach: The Neurophysiology of Aesthetic Experience:

The goal of this session is to: a) introduce Semir Zeki's claim that artists are intuitive neurophysiologists whose works reveal an understanding of the role of the early visual brain in the construction of the structure of appearances, and b) discuss Zeki's thesis within the context of Fry and Ruskin's formalist conception of the practice of painting as a rigorous examination of the structure of appearances.

Session 6. Calder's Mobiles and the Mona Lisa:

The goal of this session is to evaluate a case study which exemplify the bottom-up approach: Semir Zeki's claim that Alexander Calder's sculpture consciously exploits the receptive field properties of motion sensitive neurons.

Session 7. Discussion of Zeki's Thesis:

Zeki's theory does not address the issue of interpretation. The goal of this discussion is to evaluate two potential difficulties for Zeki's theory: a) Jennifer McMahon's claim that Zeki's theory is limited by the fact that it can only explain the perceptual content of highly abstract works which exploit formal visual elements in relative isolation, e.g. Calder's use of motion, and b) the claim discussed in Sessions 2 and 3 that the value of the formal structure of an artwork is derived from an interpretation.

C. Top-Down Approaches:

Constructivist theories of vision argue that form perception involves top down processes which match sensory data to perceptual schema containing prior knowledge about the shapes and relative sizes of particular types of objects. Top-down approaches focus on the way artists exploit these processes in the construction of their works.

Session 8. A Top-Down Approach: A Theory of Perceptual Beauty:

The goal of this session is to examine McMahon's claim that the phenomenal character of the experience of beautiful artworks, objects, and natural scenes involves an intuitive awareness of the role of perceptual schema in the top-down processes subserving form perception.

Session 9. A Top Down Approach: Form Perception:

The goal of this session is to examine evidence supporting McMahon's central claim that viewers can be intuitively aware of key aspects of the perceptual form of a scene or object without being able to appropriately identify them. The goal of this session is to examine evidence supporting McMahon's central claim that viewers can be intuitively aware of key aspects of the perceptual form of a scene or object without being able to appropriately identify them.

Session 10. Discussion: McMahon's Theory of Beauty:

The goal of this session is to a) discuss McMahon's theory in the context of the Fry-Ruskin Thesis, b) evaluate her application of the theory to Cubism, and c) evaluate an objection that whereas the theory can help explain the phenomenal content traditionally associated with aesthetic experience, it cannot account for the role of interpretation in the experiences associated with art.

D. Art and the Imagination:

Stephen Kosslyn argues that visual mental imagery, the act of visualizing something in your imagination, is an internal, non-perceptual visual experience caused either by recollecting or conceptualizing something. Gregory Currie suggests a role for the imagination in the production of aesthetic experiences which exploits the processes responsible for visual mental imagery.

Session 11. Art and the Imagination:

The goal of this session is to a) introduce Gregory Currie's general model for the role of the imagination in the production of aesthetic experiences, b) introduce Currie's claim that viewing a work of visual art involves a "simulated" act of seeing, and c) discuss the relationship between this model and the constructivist hypothesis.

Session 12. What is Mental Imagery?:

Currie appeals to Stephen Kosslyn's model of visual mental imagery to explain the idea of a "simulated act of seeing." The goal of this session is to discuss a) the top down role of memory and background knowledge in Stephen Kosslyn's model for mental imagery, b) behavioral, neuropsychological, and neurophysiological evidence that supports the claim that mental imagery is in fact a type of visual experience, and c) the resolution that this model suggests to the problem of interpretation.

Session 13. Discussion: Art, Imagination, Mental Imagery, and the Problem of Interpretation:

The goal of this session is to a) discuss the role of mental imagery in Currie's theory of art and the imagination, and b) evaluate the theory as a resolution to the problem of interpretation that provides complimentary roles for the phenomenal content of aesthetic experience and background art historical and cultural knowledge.

BACK TO TOP

3. Readings and Reserve List

A. Readings

Session 1: Introduction

Session 2: Aesthetic Experience and the Problem of Interpretation

1. Arthur Danto (2000). "Art and Meaning," Theories of Art Today (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2000), pp. 130 – 140. (philosophy)

2. Arthur Danto (2001). "The Work of Art and the Historical Future," The Madonna of the Future (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 416 – 431. (philosophy)

3. Noël Carroll (1991). "Beauty and the Genealogy of Art Theory," The Philosophical Forum, XXII, No. 4, pp. 307 – 334.

Session 3: The Fry-Ruskin Thesis

1. John Ruskin (1857). "from The Elements of Drawing" (Mineola, NY: Dover Publishers Inc, 1981), pp. 27 - 28. (art criticism)

2. Roger Fry (1919). "The Artist's Vision," Vision and Design, (Mineola, NY: Dover Publishers Inc, Mineola, New York,1981, pp. 33 – 38. (art criticism)

3. E. M. Gombrich (1960). "The Analysis of Vision in Art," Art and Illusion (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press), pp. 291 – 314. (psychology and art criticism)

Session 4: The Constructivist Hypothesis

1. Ellen Winner (1982). "What's in a picture," Invented Worlds (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), pp. 81 – 111 (psychology of art textbook)

2. Stephen E. Palmer (1999). "Classical Theories of Vision," Vision Science: Photons to Phenomenology (Cambridge, MAMIT Press), pp. 47 – 59. (psychology text book)

3. Kandel et al (1995). "Construction of the Visual Image," Chapter 21, Essentials of Neural Science and Behavior, pp. 387 – 485. (introductory level textbook)

Session 5: A Bottom-Up Approach: The Neurophysiology of Aesthetic Experience:

1. Diana Raffman (1993). Language Music, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1 – 15; 31 – 35. (philosophy and cognitive science)

2. Chatterjee, Anjan (2003). "Prospects for a Cognitive Neuroscience of Visual Aesthetics," Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, Volume 4. Number 2, pp 55 – 60 (cognitive science)

3. Semir Zeki (1999). Inner Vision (New York: Oxford University Press), pp. 1 – 21; 58 - 89. (philosophy and cognitive science)

Session 6: Calder's Mobiles and Mona Lisa's Smile:

1. Zeki, S. and M. Lamb (1994). "The neurology of kinetic art," Brain, 117, pp. 607 – 636. (cognitive science and aesthetics)

2. V. S. Ramachandran and R. L. Gregory (1978). "Does Color Provide an Input to Human Motion Perception?" Nature, Volume 275, September 7, pp. 55 – 56. (scientific report)

3. Margaret Livingstone (2000). "Is It Warm? Is It Real? Or Just Low Spatial Frequency?" Science, 290, November 17, p. 1299 (neuroscience).

4. Richard Latto (1995). "The Brain of the beholder," eds. The Artful Eye, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 66 – 75.

Session 7: Discussion of Zeki's Thesis:

1. Clement Greenberg (1961). "Modernist Painting," Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays and Criticism, V. 4, ed, John O'Brian, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1995, pp. 85 – 93.

2. Noël Carroll (1988). "Art, Practice, Narrative," The Monist, Volume 71, Issue 2, pp. 140 – 156.

3. Jennifer McMahon (2000) "Commentary on Semir Zeki's Inner Vision," Leonardo Online Reviews, http://mitpress.mit.edu/e-journals/Leonardo/reviews/a-raw.html. (philosophy)

Session 8: A Top-Down Approach: A Theory of Perceptual Beauty:

1. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1684). "Meditation of Knowledge, Truth, and Ideas," Philosophical Papers and Letters translated and edited by Leroy E. Loemker, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1989, pp. 291 - 295. RESERVE

2. Clive Bell (1913). The Aesthetic Hypothesis," Art, (New York: Perigree Books, 1981), pp. 15 – 34. (art criticism) RESERVE

3. Jennifer Anne McMahon (1999) "Towards a Unified Theory of Beauty (excerpt)" Literature and Aesthetics, 9, pp. 7 – 19. (philosophy and cognitive science)

4. Jennifer Anne McMahon (2001) "Beauty," in eds. Berys Gaut and Dominic McIver Lopes, The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics, Routledge, New York, pp. 227 – 238. (philosophy)

Session 9: A Top Down Approach: Form Perception:

1. Martha Farah (1992) "Perceptual Classification Deficit," Visual Agnosia, First Edition, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 30 – 33. (cognitive science)

2. Jenni A. Ogden (1996) "Vision Without Knowledge: Visual Object Agnosia and Prosopagnosia," Fractured Minds, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 125 – 141. (cognitive science)

3. Alan J. Parkin (1996) "Visual Agnosia," Explorations in Cognitive Neuropsychology, Psychology Press, New York, pp. 38 – 57. (cognitive science)

Session 10: Discussion: McMahon's Theory of Beauty:

Patrick Cavanaugh (1999) "Pictorial Art and Vision," MIT Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 648 – 651. (cognitive science)
Noël Carroll (1999). "Art and Form," Philosophy of Art (New York: Routledge), pp. 108 – 152. (philosophy)

Session 11: An Integrated Approach: Art and the Imagination:

Kendall Walton (1992) "Mimesis as Make-believe," Art Issues 21, pp. 22 – 27. (philosophy).
Gregory Currie (1991) "Book review: Mimesis as Make Believe," The Journal of Philosophy, Volume 90, pp. 367 – 370. (philosophy).
Gregory Currie (1995) "Visual Imagery as the Simulation of Vision," Mind and Language, Volume 10, Number 1/2, March/June, pp. 25 – 44. (philosophy and cognitive science)

Session 12: What is Mental Imagery?:

1. Stephen Kosslyn (1996) "Resolving the Imagery Debates," Image and Brain, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 2 – 21. (cognitive science)

2. William Thompson and Steven Kosslyn (2000) "Neural Systems Activated during Visual Mental Imagery," in eds. Arthur W. Toga and John C. Mazziotta, Brain Mapping: The Systems, Academic Press, New York, 2000, pp. 535 – 540. (cognitive neuroscience)

3. Chris Frith and Raymond J. Dolan (1997). "Brain mechanisms associated with top down processing in perception," Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, Volume 352, Number 1, pp. 1221 – 1230.

4. S. M. Kosslyn et al (1999) "The Role of Area 17 in Visual Imagery: Convergent Evidence from PET and rTMS," Science, Volume 284, Number 5411, April, pp. 167-170. (cognitive neuroscience).

Session 13: Discussion: Art, Imagination, Mental Imagery, and the Problem of Interpretation:

Paul Guyer (1996). Kant and the Experience of Freedom, Chapter 2 & pp. 131 – 141, New York: Cambridge University Press. (philosophy)
Noël Carroll (2002) "Aesthetic Experience Revisted," British Journal of Aesthetics, Volume 42, Number 2, pp. 145 – 168.
Noël Carroll (1986) "Art and Interaction," Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, XLV, No. 1, pp. 57 – 68. (philosophy)

B. Course Packet List

1. Carroll, Noël (1986) "Art and Interaction," The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism," XLV, No. 1, Fall, pp. 57 – 68.

[PACKET 1 – 13]

2. Danto, Arthur (2000a) "The Work of Art and the Historical Future," The Madonna of the Future, University of California Press, pp. 441 – 4

[PACKET 14 -22]

3. Danto, Arthur (2000b) "Art and Meaning," Madonna of the Future, University of California Press, pp. xvii – xxx.

[PACKET 23 – 31]

4. Gombrich, E. H. (1960) "The Analysis of Vision in Art," Art and Illusion, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2000, pp. 291 – 314.

[PACKET 32 – 58]

5. Ruskin, John (1857) "Letter I, Exercise i, paragraphs 5 – 6," The Elements of Drawing, Dover Publications Inc, New York, 1971, pp. 27 - 29.

[PACKET 59 – 61]

6. Fry, Roger (1909) "An Essay in Aesthetics," Vision and Design, Dover Publications Inc., Mineola, NY, 1981, pp. 12 – 19.

[PACKET 62 – 66]

7. Fry, Roger (1919) "The Artist's Vision," Vision and Design, Dover Publications Inc., Mineola, NY, 1981, pp. 33 – 38.

[PACKET 67 – 71]

8. McPherson, Fiona (2002) "The scope and place of philosophy in perception," www.girton.cam.ac.uk/users/fem30/pp/intro.html

[PACKET 72]

9. Raffman, Diana (1993) Language Music, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1 – 15.

[PACKET 73 – 82]

10. Zeki, Semir (1999) Inner Vision, Oxford University Press, pp. 1 – 21.

[PACKET 83 – 94]

11. Palmer, Stephen E. (1999) "Classical Theories of Vision," Vision Science: Photons to Phenomenology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 47 – 59.

[PACKET 95 – 109]

12. Zeki, Semir (1999) "Art and the Brain," Journal of Consciousness Studies, Volume 6, June/July, pp. 76 – 96.

[PACKET 110 – 131]

13. Zeki, Semir (1994) "The neurology of kinetic art," Brain, 117, pp. 607 – 636.

[PACKET 132 – 161]

14. Ramachandran, V. S. and R. L. Gregory (1978) "Does Color Provide an Input to Human Motion Perception?" Nature, Volume 275, September 7, pp. 55 – 56.

[PACKET 162 – 165]

15. Livingstone, Margaret S. (2000) "Is It Warm? Is It Real? Or Just Low Spatial Frequency?" Science, 290, November 17, p. 1299.

[PACKET 166]

16. McMahon, Jennifer Anne (2000) "Commentary on Semir Zeki's Inner Vision," Leonardo Online Reviews, http://mitpress.mit.edu/ejournals/Leonardo/ reviews/sep2000/bk_INNVIS_mcmahon.html

[PACKET 167 – 172]

17. McMahon, Jennifer Anne (2001) "Beauty," in eds. Berys Gaut and Dominic McIver Lopes, The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics, Routledge, New York, pp. 227 – 238.

[PACKET 173 – 186]

18. McMahon, Jennifer Anne (1999) "Towards a Unified Theory of Beauty (excerpt)" Literature and Aesthetics, 9, pp. 7 – 19.

[PACKET 187 – 205]

19. Farah, Martha (1992) "Perceptual Classification Deficit," Visual Agnosia, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 30 – 33.

[PACKET 206 – 209]

20. Ogden, Jenni A. (1996) "Vision Without Knowledge: Visual Object Agnosia and Prosopagnosia," Fractured Minds, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 125 – 141.

[PACKET 210 – 228]

21. Parkin, Alan J. (1996) "Visual Agnosia," Explorations in Cognitive Neuropsychology, Psychology Press, New York, pp. 38 – 57.

[PACKET 229 – 247]

22. Cavanaugh, Patrick (1999) "Pictorial Art and Vision," MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, eds. Robert A. Wilson and Frank C. Keil, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 648 – 651, http://cognet.mit.edu/MITECS/Articles/cavanaugh1.html.

[PACKET 248 – 251]

23. Walton, Kendall (1992) "Mimesis as Make-believe," Art Issues 21, pp. 22 – 27.

[PACKET 252 – 258]

24. Currie, Gregory (1991) "Book Review: Mimesis as Make-Believe," Journal of Philosophy, Volume 90, July, pp. 367 – 370.

[PACKET 259 – 263]

25. Currie, Gregory (1995) "Visual Imagery as the Simulation of Vision," Mind and Language, Volume 10, Number 1/2, March/June, pp. 25 – 44.

[PACKET 264 – 275]

26. Kosslyn, Stephen M. (1996) "Resolving the Imagery Debates," Imagery and the Brain, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 2 – 21.

[PACKET 276 – 298]

27. Kosslyn, S. M., A. Pascual-Leone, O. Felician, S. Camposano, J. P. Keenan, W. L. Thompson, G. Ganis, K. E. Sukel, N. M. Alpert (1999) "The Role of Area 17 in Visual Imagery: Convergent Evidence from PET and rTMS," Science, Volume 284, Number 5411, April, pp. 167-170.

[PACKET 299 – 302]

28. Thompson, William L. and Stephen M. Kosslyn (2000) "Neural systems activated during visual mental imagery: a review and meta-analysis," in eds. Arthur W. Toga and John C. Mazziotta, Brain Mapping: The Systems, Academic Press, New York, 2000, pp. 535 – 542.

[PACKET 303 – 312]

29. Greenberg, Clement (1960) "Modernist Painting," Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays and Criticism, Volume 4, ed, John O'Brian, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1995, pp. 85 – 93.

[PACKET 313 – 319]

30. Carroll, Noël (1991) "Beauty and the Genealogy of Art Theory," The Philosophical Forum, Volume XXII, No. 4, Summer, pp. 307 – 334.

[PACKET 320 – 335]

Akins, Kathleen (1996). "Of Sensory Systems and the Aboutness of mental States," Journal of Philosophy, Volume 93, Number 7, July, pp. 337 – 372.

[PACKET: 336 – 371]

Winner, Ellen (1982).. "What's In a Picture?" Chapter 3, Invented Worlds, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 81 – 111.

[PACKET: 372 – 402]

Carroll, Noël (2002).. "Aesthetic Experience Revisited," British Journal of Aesthetics, Volume 42, Number 2, April, pp. 145 – 168.

[PACKET: 403 – 426]

McMahon, Jennifer Anne (2000). "Perceptual Beauty as the Basis for Genuine Judgments of Beauty," Journal of Consciousness Studies, Volume 7, No. 8/9, August/September, pp. 29 – 35.

[PACKET: 427 – 433]

Ramachandran, V. S and William Hirstein (2000). "The Science of Art: A neurological theory of aesthetic experience," Journal of Consciousness Studies, Volume 6, No. 6/7, June/July, pp. 15 – 51.

[PACKET: 434 – 470]

Chatterjee, Anjan (2003). "Prospects for a Cognitive Neuroscience of Visual Aesthetics," Bulletin of Psychology and the Arts, Volume 4. Number 2, pp 55 – 60. (Journal of American Psychological Association – Division 10, The Society for Aesthetics, Creativity and the Psychology of the Arts)

[PACKET: 471 – 477]

Chatterjee, Anjan (2004). "The Neuropsychology of Visual Artistic Expression," Neuropsychologia, Volume 42, pp. 1568-1583.

[PACKET: 478 – 494]

Frith, Chris and Raymond J. Dolan (1997). "Brain mechanisms associated with top down processing in perception," Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, Volume 352, Number 1, pp. 1221 – 1230.

[PACKET: 495 – 506]

Carroll, Noël (1988). "Art, Practice, and Narrative," The Monist, Volume 71, Number 2, pp. 140 – 156.

[PACKET: 507 – 523]

Rickey, George (1963). "The Morphology of Movement," Art Journal, Volume 22, Number 4, pp. 220 – 231.

[PACKET: 524 – 535]

C. Reserve List & Supplementary Sources

Reserve List:

Course Packet: CSES391b
Ashcraft, Mark H., Fundamentals of Cognition, Prentice Hall, New York, 1998. BF311 .A727X 1998(LC)
Ashcraft, Mark H., Human Memory and Cognition, Scott, Foresman, Glennview, Ill, 1989. BF371 A64 1989 (LC)
Bechtel, William (1988). Philosophy of science : an overview for cognitive science, Hillsdale, N.J. : L. Erlbaum Q175 B385 1988
Bell, Clive, Art, Perigree Books, New York, 1981. J12 B413 914B
Boyd, Richard, Philip Gasper, and J.D. Trout (1995). The Philosophy of Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Q175.3 P47X 1991
Carroll, Noel, Beyond Aesthetics, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2001. BH39 C3752X
Carroll, Noel, Philosophy of Art, Routledge, New York, 1999. BH39 C376X 1999 (LC)
Dickie, George, Richard Sclafini, and Ronald Roblin, Aesthetics, St. Martin's Press, New York, 1989. BH21 A35 (LC)
Currie, Gregory and Ian Ravenscroft (2002) Recreative Minds, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 71 – 88. BH301.I53 C87X 2002 (LC)
Davies, Stephen, Definitions of Art, Cornell University Press, Ithica, NY,