...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Methodology and Philosophy of Science >A social epistemology of aesthetics: belief polarization, echo chambers and aesthetic judgement
【24h】

A social epistemology of aesthetics: belief polarization, echo chambers and aesthetic judgement

机译：美学的社会认识论：信念极化，回声室和美学判断

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

How dowe form aesthetic judgements? And how shouldwe do so? According to a very prominent tradition in aesthetics it would be wrong to form our aesthetic judgements about a particular object on the basis of anything other than first-hand acquaintance with the object itself (or some very close surrogate) and, in particular, it would be wrong to form such judgements merely on the basis of testimony. Further this tradition presupposes that our actual practice of forming aesthetic judgements typically meets, or at least approximates, this ideal. In this paper I target this descriptive claim and argue-by appeal to some empirical work concerning belief polarization and echo chambers in aesthetics-that our actual practice of forming aesthetic judgements is heavily dependent on social sources such as testimony. I then briefly consider what normative implications this descriptive claim may have.
机译：我们如何形成审美判断？而我们应该怎么做呢？根据美学上非常突出的传统，基于对物体本身的第一手认识（或一些非常接近的替代），我们对特定物体的美学判断是错误的，特别是，这将是错误的。仅凭证词作出这样的判断是错误的。此外，这种传统还以我们形成审美判断的实际实践通常满足或至少近似于这一理想为前提。在本文中，我针对这种描述性主张，并通过诉诸于一些有关美学中的信念极化和回声室的经验性工作，来证明我们形成美学判断的实际做法在很大程度上取决于社会来源，例如证词。然后，我简要考虑一下此描述性声明可能具有的规范含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号