There is no question that neurological process is a vehicle for any human action including the most complex - Art. In trying to analyze the connection it would be methodologically correct to use natural bridge between two - experimental psychology. The field that closely deals with both. Boris Shoshensky
-- Luc Delannoy <[email protected]> wrote: Geoff, is hostility in the air ? or patronizing ? Geoff to WC: "When you learn something about aesthetics from brain imaging and neurosurgery let me know what it is." Luc to Geoff: Where have you been in the last 20 years? Geoff to WC "...infer poetically.." Luc to Geoff You mean neuroscientists are poets ? Neuroscience + aesthetics = neuroaesthetics is not about understanding expressionism or impressionism per se but about studying and understanding the nature of the human creative process (both from the creator and receptor perspectives.) That includes coming up with a theory of perception. It seems you are confusing the process and the outcome or result of the process. Neuroaesthetics could help understand how the artist got there and how/why the public feels what/how/when it feels. It is not about the "artwork" per se but about processes (auditive, visual for example). It combines principles from evolutionary biology, functional brain anatomy, perceptual and cognitive psychology, musicology, philosophy, cognitive archaelogy, anthropology. Since we know that a brain could see an object simultaneously under different perspectives we understand how an artist got to cubism. A stressed brain with aesthetic fatigue could explain Magritte's works. As far as the public taste you are mentioning, you might investigate the invariants in functional brain anatomy - they might explain the reasons why people from different cultures at different times enjoy Don Gionnavi for example, or Vermeer... Understanding the auditive and visual brains can help us design proposals for the education system and talk straight in the eye to members of departments of education. Neuroscience and neuroaesthetics in particular is not about me in front of a painting trying to understand the meaning of the concept of impressionism; it is about the well being of society at large About reading: some of the seeds of neuroaesthetics are in De Anima by Aristotle (see also Theophrast). Then we could jump to Montaigne and John Dewey to read about human experience. Then jump to Ramachandran and Amy Ione for example, but also to the philosophers working on the relations between art, brain and human consciousness. But then also: Alcmeon, Galeno, Thomas Willis, Da Vinci, Galvani, Broca, Wiernicke, Brodmann I just simply cannot drop names... I myself investigate musical consciousness. I currently work in Mexico with a group of patients with cerebral palsy (working on neuroplasticity to better their condition). They couldn't care less about sarcams about the validity of neurosciences. They couldn't care less if some people have existential anxiety when viewing voxels on a computer screen, voxels that "translate" their aesthetics experience of a painting. We paint and make music and we do that because we have learned about neurological deficits and functional brain anatomy and because we have learned about the human creative processes and how music and art (with its subcategories) could bring well being to our society. And by the way, the falsity of mind-body split is so evident with such patients that it amazes me to meet people who still believe that the mind is somewhere out there... And that it's up to me. My apologies to the group for this long post. Luc www.lucdelannoy.com ----- Original Message ---- From: Geoff <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 11:40:51 AM Subject: Re: Neurology and "Art" William: Fine with me. Neuroscience doesn't scare me. When you learn something about aesthetics from brain imaging and neurosurgery let me know what it is. I have a suspicion that what you will learn about is brain imaging and neurosurgery. Now, if you want to infer poetically from your new knowledge, that would be up to you. Just let me know what you've learned about hard edge realism or expressionism or public (or private) taste in any field of artistic endeavour. Infants' direction of gaze or length of gaze won't cut it with me. Geoff C ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Conger" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 11:00 AM Subject: Re: Neurology and "Art" > You don't get it because you're not trying at all. You cite no experts. You begin with a judgment, based on a preconceived idea, faulty at the first level of logic, and hold to that. It's not about science vs the humanities. It's about the substance of the physical world and how we function in it as physical beings. Our beliefs are a product of that physicality and they are themselves symbolized networks of biological life. As a noted biochemist said,"biology does not stop at the neck". > > Obviously, measuring is more than placing a ruler next to something. It means analysis of data, deductive and inductive reasoning, testing hypothesis, and the like. If it's physical, it's measurable; that is, belief with evidence. And what is not physical is merely belief without evidence. So if we are confined to belief, why not try to gather as much evidence for beliefs as we can? What is the history of mankind if not the gathering of evidence for beliefs? What is so taboo about wanting to do that? Why is it good to have beliefs without evidence. As I said earlier, this refusal to even examine the issue (brain=mind) is a redux of the prelate refusing to look through Galileo's telescope. > > I think you are just resisting the falsity of the mind-body split. > > I'll say that neuroscience is the most promising route of inquiry for new perspectives on aesthetic judgment, just as it is for all cognition. If science can show us how we think it can lead us to why we think. > > Tell me again why this is such a dangerous and censored idea. Is it the Bible? Some religious dogma? > > Finally, why do you and others here use gossipy anecdotes to illustrate your arguments? Doing that is a ruse, an effort to make complicated, nuanced concepts simple and everyday. Your dentist and his painless patient: My dentist has a very high speed drill, enabling many people to forego a local anesthetic. What's the point of these anecdotes? Everybody knows that a general principle is not proven or falsified by one odd exception. "Man falls 5,000 ft. from airplane and lives!" "Woman is shot five times in head and complains only of a mild headache!" "Monkey art sells for thousands!" Is this a gossip list or a open-minded thinkers' list? > WC > >> Neuroscience is a legitimate interest and provides >> important information to >> physicians etc. As an important source of information about >> aesthetic>> judgments - I don't get it >> Geoff C ____________________________________________________________ Click for free info on online degrees and make up to $150K/ year. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/PnY6rx93U6l3QAQjfBohcBrbdH8sX3 X6QCIZyHf0ufgjDMvKX9qj6/
