Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ DSpace at the Univer...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
addClaim

Thinking Evolutionary Aesthetics Empirically: A Dissertation Exploring Empirical Approaches to Questions of Art, Aesthetics, and Evolution

Authors: Fullerton, Brady;

Thinking Evolutionary Aesthetics Empirically: A Dissertation Exploring Empirical Approaches to Questions of Art, Aesthetics, and Evolution

Abstract

Evolutionary aesthetics is a field of interdisciplinary research that explores the relationship between human aesthetic sensibilities and evolutionary biology. This field has gained popularity in the last several decades with many competing theories. Authors such as Denis Dutton and Stephen Davies have offered theoretical comparative accounts of the various positions within evolutionary aesthetics. However, relatively little work has been done comparing these theories empirically. This is not to say that the field of evolutionary aesthetics is devoid of evidence-based approaches. Most of the theories advanced in evolutionary aesthetics make an appeal to biological or cultural evidence. However, they typically fall short of any sort of rigorous empirical test. In this dissertation I explore the field of evolutionary aesthetics using a decidedly empirical approach by statistically analyzing cross-cultural ethnographic data and by employing cultural phylogenies based on linguistic relationships. Chapter 2 presents a cross-cultural statistical test of Ellen Dissanayake’s evolutionary aesthetic theory that art “brings us together” by directing communal attention. My results in this chapter are broadly supportive of Dissanayake’s evolutionary aesthetic theory. Chapter 3 builds on my cross-cultural approach to Dissanayake by pursuing a phylogenetic analysis of her evolutionary aesthetic theory. This approach serves as both a replication study (using the same variables from Chapter 2) and a novel method analysis (using different variables from Chapter 2). The results of this chapter are less conclusive and suggest the limitations of certain empirical approaches. In Chapter 4, I outline a five-step methodology for approaching positions within evolutionary aesthetics in order to assess them for empirical testability. This methodology builds on the lessons learned in the previous two chapters in order to foster future empirical work in evolutionary aesthetics. After outlining this five-step methodology I apply it to the evolutionary aesthetic work of Ellen Dissanayake, Geoffrey Miller, and Steven Pinker. These applications of the five-step methodology serve to define both the theoretical and empirical work necessary for an empirical approach to evolutionary aesthetics as well as creating fertile ground for future research.

Country
Canada
Related Organizations
Keywords

experimental philosophy, philosophy of biology, aesthetics, data analysis, empirical philosophy, evolutionary aesthetics, digital humanities, art

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green
Related to Research communities