Abstract
To introduce the reader to the philosophical debates about the science of the arts, I review existing research and discuss three philosophical theses. As a background claim, I begin with the co-dependence thesis, which states that dependence relations have tied arts and sciences together in the past and continue to interlink them in the current historical context. The co-dependence thesis is contested in the debate about the foundations of the science of art. Recent scientific investigations into the arts and aesthetic evaluations have raised two questions. First, is a science art feasible? Second, if such a science is feasible, what are the principles and methods that should provide its conceptual foundations? To examine these questions, I first discuss an objection from art’s specificity, which rests on the idea that empirical studies of art have failed to identify and explain the factors that are distinctive of art. It is one of the most influential philosophical objections to research aimed at developing an empirically-grounded science of art. Notwithstanding this objection, I defend and apply to art theory the thesis of critical naturalism, which holds that scientific and empirical investigations of artistic practices and aesthetic experiences can contribute to our descriptive and normative understanding of the arts. The science of the arts is made of works that create, analyse and test interdisciplinary models of art practices and appreciation. To implement critical naturalism, I introduce the psychohistorical thesis, which states that a method apt for developing integrative explanations of artistic practices and experiences consists in combining research on the mental capacities engaged in the arts with enquiries into the historical and cultural genealogy of such practices. The three theses I present are philosophical heuristics understood as general thoughts that can orient interdisciplinary enquiry and suggest research hypotheses. Although these three theses should not be understood as empirical hypotheses, some ideas derived from these theses have been operationalised as hypotheses and tested by empirical methods.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In the present chapter, I use the terms model and theory interchangeably.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
For a defence of the search for laws in empirical aesthetics, see Martindale (1990), pp. 3–13.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
Mechanistic explanations in science use the functional decomposition of a mechanism into parts and activities. Thagard (1992, 2006, 2019), Bechtel (2008), Bechtel and Richardson (1993/2010), and Craver (2007) have argued that mechanistic explanations is an important type of explanation in biology in general and neuroscience in particular.
- 9.
Artists, humanists, and social scientists typically engage with artistic practices with contextualist approaches (Bullot and Reber 2013a; Danto 1964; Harrop and Bullot in press; Hogan 2013; Levinson 2007). Their view is contextualist in the sense that they understand works of art within the constraints of the careful interpretation of unique social and historical contexts (or artworlds). Fields such as the continental philosophy of art, art history and visual culture, media studies typically analyse artistic practices as anchored into a cultural and social context. Some contextualists, such as the anthropologist Geertz (1973), claim that the explanation of social practices (e.g., ceremonial and artistic practices) need to be explained by means of ‘thick descriptions’ that capture the significance of each social practice in its unique cultural context.
- 10.
- 11.
The argument can also be run with a focus on the evaluation of the social rules that govern artistic practices and judgements. When debating artistry and artistic values, people make normative judgements in relation to whether particular artistic decisions are good or bad, apt or inapt. But, says the pessimist, good and bad artistic decisions will engage the same shared mental systems. This idea again refers to the premise of the shared systems in the objection from art’s specificity. From this the pessimist concludes that the biological and cognitive sciences describing these shared systems will not be of any use in understanding or justifying our normative artistic judgements. These sciences, consequently, fail to locate art (or good art) because such sciences do not offer us resources to understand the normative dimension of artistic creation and appreciation.
- 12.
- 13.
In this narrative, the character of ‘Clement’ is loosely inspired by Greenberg’s (1999) methods in art criticism, which emphasised intuition and immediate experience.
- 14.
The company operates today out of Alice Springs and is widely regarded as the premier purveyor of Aboriginal art in Central Australia.
- 15.
In addition to the work’s connection with core concepts from Pitjantjatjara people in central Australia (like the Tjukurrpa [Dreamtime]), we can discover that the painted figures were intended to be pictograms and diagrams. The painting is symbolic, it includes exemplifications and representations, as explained by notes made by the curator who worked with the artist.
- 16.
The historical categories that we use to identify works of art include: (1) categories of genre of fine arts such as painting, music, and photography; (2) technical concepts associated with a particular field of artistic practice (e.g., chiaroscuro, tonality, synthesizer, chance operation); (3) concepts of artistic styles, such as the baroque style, the minimalist style, or the hip hop style; (4) categories of norms used to identity and value of works of art, such as the concept of formalism and modernism.
- 17.
This research includes enquiries into the effects of training and expertise on art appreciation (Else et al. 2015; Hekkert and van Wieringen 1996b; Nodine et al. 1993), framing effects caused by artistic labels (Huang et al. 2011; Kirk et al. 2009; Silveira et al. 2015), and the importance of information regarding artistic authenticity (Newman and Bloom 2012).
References
Aiken, N.E.: The Biological Origins of Art. Praeger Publishers, Westport (1998)
Anderson, J.C.: Aesthetic concepts of art. In: Carroll, N. (ed.) Theories of Art Today, pp. 65–92. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison (2000)
Bechtel, W.: Mental Mechanisms: Philosophical Perspectives on Cognitive Neuroscience. Routledge, New York (2008)
Bechtel, W., Richardson, R.C.: Discovering Complexity: Decomposition and Localization as Strategies in Scientific Research. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1993/2010)
Berlyne, D.E.: Aesthetics and Psychobiology. Meredith Corporation, New York (1971)
Bloom, P.: Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion. The Bodley Head, London (2016)
Brown, S., Gao, X., Tisdelle, L., Eickhoff, S.B., Liotti, M.: Naturalizing aesthetics: brain areas for aesthetic appraisal across sensory modalities. Neuroimage 58(1), 250–258 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.06.012 (Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811911006203)
Bullot, N.J.: Material anamnesis and the prompting of aesthetic worlds: the psycho-historical theory of artworks. J. Conscious. Stud. 16(1), 85–109 (2009). (Retrieved from http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/2009/00000016/00000001/art00004)
Bullot, N.J., Reber, R.: The artful mind meets art history: toward a psycho-historical framework for the science of art appreciation. Behav. Brain Sci. 36(02), 123–137 (2013a). https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x12000489
Bullot, N.J., Reber, R.: A psycho-historical research program for the integrative science of art. Behav. Brain Sci. 36(2), 163–180 (2013b). https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x12002464
Bullot, N.J., Reber R.: Artistic misunderstandings: the emotional significance of historical learning in the arts. Behavi. Brain. Sci. 40, (2017)
Bullot, N.J., Seeley, W.P., Davies, S.: Art and science: a philosophical sketch of their historical complexity and codependence. J. Aesthet. Art Crit. 75(4), 453–463 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12398
Casati, R., Pignocchi, A.: Mirror and canonical neurons are not constitutive of aesthetic response. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11(10), 410 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.07.007
Chatterjee, A.: Neuroaesthetics: a coming of age story. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23(1), 53–62 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2010.21457
Chatterjee, A.: The Aesthetic Brain: How We Evolved to Desire Beauty and Enjoy Art. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2013a)
Chatterjee, A.: Neuroaesthetics: range and restrictions. Behav. Brain Sci. 36(02), 137–138 (2013b). https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x12001586
Chatterjee, A., Vartanian, O.: Neuroaesthetics. Trends Cogn. Sci. 18(7), 370–375 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.03.003 (Retrieved from http://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/abstract/S1364-6613(14)00075-8)
Chatterjee, A., Vartanian, O.: Neuroscience of aesthetics. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1369(1), 172–194 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13035 (Retrieved from https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/nyas.13035)
Chmiel, A., Schubert, E.: Psycho-historical contextualization for music and visual works: a literature review and comparison between artistic mediums. Front. Psychol. 10(182) (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00182 (Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00182)
Cole, M.: Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1996/1998)
Craver, C.F.: Explaining the Brain: Mechanisms and the Mosaic Unity of Neuroscience. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)
Craver, C.F., Bechtel, W.: Mechanism. In: Skipper Jr., R., Allen, C., Ankeny, R.A., Craver, C.F., Darden, L., Mikkelson, G., Richardson, R. (eds.) Philosophy of the Life Sciences: A Reader. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)
Currie, G.: An Ontology of Art. Macmillan Press and Scots Philosophical Club, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire (1989)
Danto, A.C.: The artworld. J. Philos. 61(19), 571–584 (1964)
Danto, A.C.: The Transfiguration of the Commonplace: A Philosophy of Art. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1981)
Davies, D.: Dancing around the issues: prospects for an empirically grounded philosophy of dance. J. Aesthet. Art Crit. 71(2), 195–202 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12009 (Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jaac.12009)
Davies, S.: The Artful Species: Aesthetics, Art, and Evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)
Davies, S.: Defining art and artworlds. J. Aesthet. Art Crit. 73(4), 375–384 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12222
Dennett, D.C.: Intentional systems. J. Philos. 68(4), 87–106 (1971)
Dennett, D.C.: The interpretation of texts, people and other artifacts. Philos. Phenomenological. Res. 50, 177 (1990)
Dickie, G.: The Art Circle: A Theory of Art. Chicago Spectrum Press, Evanston, IL (1984/1997)
Dickie, G.: The institutional theory of art. In: Carroll, N. (ed.) Theories of Art Today, pp. 93–108. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison (2000)
Dissanayake, E.: What Is Art For?. University of Washington Press, Seattle (1988)
Dupré, J.: Living Causes. Aristot. Soc. Suppl. 87(1), 19–37 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8349.2013.00218.x
Dutton, D.: Aesthetic universals. In: Gaut, B., Lopes, D.M. (eds.) The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics, 2nd edn, pp. 279–292. Routledge, London (2005)
Dutton, D.: The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure & Human Evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)
Else, J.E., Ellis, J., Orme, E.: Art expertise modulates the emotional response to modern art, especially abstract: an ERP investigation. Front. Human Neurosci. 9(525) (2015). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00525 (Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00525)
Fechner, G.T.: Vorschule der Aesthetik [Elements of Aesthetics]. Druck und Verlag von Breitkopf & Härtel, Leipzig (1876)
Fodor, J.A.: Déjà vu all over again: How Danto’s aesthetics recapitulates the philosophy of mind. In: Rollins, M. (ed.) Danto and His Critics, pp. 41–54. Blackwell, Cambridge (1993)
Freedberg, D., Gallese, V.: Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11(5), 197–203 (2007)
Gaut, B.: “Art” as a cluster concept. In: Carroll, N. (ed.) Theories of Art Today, pp. 25–44. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison (2000)
Geertz, C.: The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. Basic Books, New York (1973)
Gelman, S.A.: The Essential Child: Origins of Essentialism in Everyday Thought. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)
Gelman, S.A.: Artifacts and essentialism. Rev. Philos. Psychol 4(3), 449–463 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-013-0142-7
Gombrich, E.H.: Concerning ‘The science of art’: Commentary on Ramachandran and Hirstein. J. Conscious. Stud. 7(8–9), 17 (2000)
Gopnik, B.: Aesthetic science and artistic knowledge. In: Shimamura, A.P., Palmer, S.E. (eds.) Aesthetic Science: Connecting Minds, Brains, and Experience, pp. 129–159. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)
Greenberg, C.: Intuition and esthetic experience. Homemade Esthetics: Observations on Art and Taste, pp. 3–9. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)
Harrop, L., Bullot, N.J.: The decommission of I See Red: a case study in the relations between art and law. In: McCutcheon, J., McGaughey, F. (eds.) A Research Handbook on Art and Law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK (in press)
Hekkert, P., van Wieringen, P.C.W.: Beauty in the eye of expert and nonexpert beholders: a study in the appraisal of art. Am. J. Psychol. 109(3), 389 (1996)
Hekkert, P., van Wieringen, P.C.W.: The impact of level of expertise on the evaluation of original and altered versions of post-impressionistic paintings. Acta Physiol. (Oxf) 94(2), 117–131 (1996b). https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(95)00055-0 (Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0001691895000550)
Hempel, C.G.: Aspects of Scientific Explanation. The Free Press, New York (1965)
Henrich, J., Heine, S.J., Norenzayan, A.: The weirdest people in the world? Behav. Brain Sci. 33(2–3), 61–83 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x0999152x
Heyes, C.M.: Cognitive Gadgets: The Cultural Evolution of Thinking. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2018)
Hickok, G.: The Myth of Mirror Neurons: The Real Neuroscience of Communication and Cognition. W. W. Norton, New York (2014)
Hogan, P.C.: How authors' minds make stories. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2013)
Huang, M., Bridge, H., Kemp, M., Parker, A.: Human cortical activity evoked by the assignment of authenticity when viewing works of art. Front. Human Neurosci. 5(134) (2011). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00134 (Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00134)
Hyman, J.: Art and neuroscience. In: Frigg, R., Hunter, M. (eds.) Beyond Mimesis and Convention, pp. 245–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Ingarden, R.: Ontology of the Work of Art (Meyer, R., Goldthwait, J.T., Trans.). Ohio University Press, Athens (1989)
Johnson, V.: Once Upon a Time in Papunya. UNSW Press, Randwick (2010)
Kelemen, D., Carey, S.: The essence of artifacts: Developing the design stance. Creations of the Mind: Theories of Artifacts and Their Representation. E. Margolis and S. Laurence. pp. 212–230. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)
Kirk, U., Skov, M., Hulme, O., Christensen, M.S., Zeki, S.: Modulation of aesthetic value by semantic context: an fMRI study. Neuroimage 44(3), 1125–1132 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.10.009 (Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811908011099)
Kukkonen, K.: A prehistory of cognitive poetics: neoclassicism and the novel. Oxford University Press (2017)
Langer, F.: Art theory for (neuro)scientists: bridging the gap. Poet. Today 37(4), 497–516 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1215/03335372-3638030
Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., Augustin, D.: A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. Br. J. Psychol. 95(4), 489–508 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1348/0007126042369811
Leder, H., Gerger, G., Dressier, S.G., Schabmann, A.: How art is appreciated. Psychol. Aesthet. Creativity Arts 6(1), 2–10 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026396 (Retrieved from http://ezproxy.cdu.edu.au/login?url, http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,uid&db=aph&AN=71969660&site=ehost-live)
Lende, D.H., Downey, G. (eds.): The Encultured Brain: An Introduction to Neuroanthropology. MIT Press, Cambridge (2012)
Levinson, J.: Defining art historically. Br. J. Aesthet. 19, 232–250 (1979)
Levinson, J.: Aesthetic contextualism. Postgrad. J. Aesthet. 4(3), 1–12 (2007)
Levitin, D.J.: This Is Your Brain on Music: The Science of a Human Obsession. Dutton, New York (2006)
Levitin, D.J., Tirovolas, A.K.: Current advances in the cognitive neuroscience of music. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1156(1), 211–231 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04417.x (Retrieved from https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04417.x)
Lopes, D.M.: Beyond Art. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2014)
Margolis, E., Laurence, S. (eds.): Creations of the Mind: Theories of Artifacts and Their Representation. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)
Margolis, J.: Prospects for a science of aesthetic perception. In: Fisher, J. (ed.) Perceiving Artworks, pp. 213–239. Temple University Press, Philadelphia (1980)
Margolis, J.: Historied Thought, Constructed World: A Conceptual Primer for the Turn of the Millennium. University of California Press, Berkeley (1995)
Margolis, J.: The deviant ontology of artworks. In: Carroll, N. (ed.) Theories of Art Today, pp. 109–129. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison (2000)
Martindale, C.: The Clockwork Muse: The Predictability of Artistic Change. Basic Books, New York, NY (1990)
McFee, G.: The Philosophical Aesthetics of Dance: Identity, Performance and Understanding. Dance Books, Alton (2011)
Meskin, A., Robson, J., Ichino, A., Goffin, K., Monseré, A.: Philosophical aesthetics and cognitive science. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 9(1), 1445 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1445 (Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/wcs.1445)
Newman, G.E., Bloom, P.: Art and authenticity: the importance of originals in judgments of value. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 141(3), 558–569 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026035
Newman, G.E., Diesendruck, G., Bloom, P.: Celebrity contagion and the value of objects. J. Consum. Res. 38, 215–228 (2011)
Nodine, C.F., Locher, P.J., Krupinski, E.A.: The role of formal art training on perception and aesthetic judgment of art compositions. Leonardo 26(3), 219–227 (1993)
Noë, A.: Art and the Limits of Neuroscience. The New York Times (December 4) http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/2012/2004/art-and-the-limits-of-neuroscience/
Noë, A.: Strange Tools: Art and Human Nature. Hill and Wang, New York (2015)
Patel, A.D.: Music, Language, and the Brain. Oxford University Press, USA, Oxford (2010)
Peretz, I.: The nature of music from a biological perspective. Cognition 100(1), 1–32 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.11.004 (Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027705002209)
Peretz, I., Zatorre, R.J. (eds.): The Cognitive Neuroscience of Music. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)
Pinker, S.: How the Mind Works. W.W. Norton & Company, New York (1997)
Pinker, S.: The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. Penguin Books, London (2002)
Ramachandran, V.S.: Sharpening up ‘The science of art’. J. Conscious. Stud. 8(1), 9–29 (2001)
Ramachandran, V.S.: The Tell-Tale Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Quest for What Makes Us Human. W. W. Norton, New York (2011)
Ramachandran, V.S., Hirstein, W.: The science of art: a neurological theory of aesthetic experience. J. Conscious. Stud. 6(6–7), 15–51 (1999) (Retrieved from http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/1999/00000006/F0020006/949)
Richerson, P.J., Boyd, R.: Not by Genes Alone, How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2005)
Salmon, W.C.: Scientific explanation. In: Salmon, M.H., Earman, J., Glymour, C., Lennox, J.G., Machamer, P., McGuire, J.E., Norton, J.D., Salmon, W.C., Schaffner, K.F. (eds.) Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, pp. 7–41. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1992)
Seeley, W.P.: What is the cognitive neuroscience of art… and why should we care? Newsl. Am. Soc. Aesthet. 31(2), 1–4 (2011)
Seeley, W.P.: Art, meaning, and perception: a question of methods for a cognitive neuroscience of art. Br. J. Aesthet. 53(4), 443–460 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1093/aesthj/ayt022 (Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/aesthj/ayt022)
Shimamura, A.P.: Experiencing Art: In the Brain of the Beholder. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2015)
Shimamura, A.P., Palmer, S.E. (eds.): Aesthetic Science: Connecting Minds, Brains, and Experience. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)
Shiner, L.: The Invention of Art: A Cultural History. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2001)
Silveira, S., Fehse, K., Vedder, A., Elvers, K., Hennig-Fast, K.: Is it the picture or is it the frame? An fMRI study on the neurobiology of framing effects. Front. Human Neurosci. 9(528) (2015). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00528 (Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00528)
Simon, H.A.: Discovering explanations. In: Keil, F.C., Wilson, R.A. (eds.) Explanation and Cognition, pp. 21–59. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2000)
Skov, M., Vartanian, O.: Neuroaesthetics. Baywood Pub, Amityville (2009)
Snow, C.P.: The Two Cultures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1959)
Solso, R.L.: Cognition and the Visual Arts. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)
Solso, R.L.: The cognitive neuroscience of art: a preliminary fMRI observation. J. Conscious. Stud. 7(8–9), 75–85 (2000)
Solso, R.L.: The Psychology of Art and the Evolution of the Conscious Brain. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)
Thagard, P.: Conceptual Revolutions. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1992)
Thagard, P.: Hot Thought: Mechanisms and Applications of Emotional Cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)
Thagard, P.: Natural Philosophy: From Social Brains to Knowledge, Reality, Morality, and Beauty. Oxford University Press, New York (2019)
Thompson, W.F.: Music, Thought, and Feeling: Understanding the Psychology of Music. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)
Wilson, R.A., et al.: When traditional essentialism fails: biological natural kinds. Philos. Top. 35(1-2), 189–215 (2007)
Woodward, J.: Making Things Happen: A Theory of Causal Explanation. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)
Zeki, S.: Art and the brain. Dædalus 127, 71–103 (1998)
Zeki, S.: Inner Vision: An Exploration of Art and the Brain. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)
Zeki, S.: Artistic creativity and the brain. Science 293, 51–52 (2001)
Zeki, S., Lamb, M.: The neurology of kinetic art. Brain 117, 607–636 (1994)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bullot, N.J. (2019). A Psychohistorical Philosophy for the Science of the Arts. In: Wuppuluri, S., Wu, D. (eds) On Art and Science. The Frontiers Collection. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27577-8_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27577-8_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27576-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27577-8
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)