Advertisement

Introduction

  • Paul M. W. HackettEmail author
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Philosophy book series (BRIEFSPHILOSOPH)

Abstract

In any book, the first chapter sets the scene for what the reader is going to encounter as they progress in their reading. This book is no different and in this introductory chapter, I succinctly establish the main components of the coming essay in such a manner that, I hope, will reduce later surprises that are potentially confusing and enhance the reader’s sense of accumulative discovery and knowledge development. I start by considering the idea of categories of art and art experience including notions of aesthetics and figure ground relationships. In order to achieve clarity in my claims I then go on to define the major terms that I use including: mapping sentences; ontology; hermeneutics and hermeneutic consistency; mereology; facet theory in general and in particular qualitative facet theory and the mapping sentence (as this relates to notions of a flexible hermeneutically consistent template); three-dimensional abstract art. The overall aim of this chapter is to prepare the reader for my enquiries into viewers’ experiences when looking at three-dimensional abstract art.

Keywords

Categories Art Abstract art Art experience Figure–ground Mapping sentence Hermeneutics Ontology Mereology Facet theory 

References

  1. Aristotle, Ackrill JL (1975) Aristotle’s categories and de Interpretatione. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Beebee H, Hitchcock C, Menzies P (eds) (2012) The oxford handbook of causation. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Borg I, Shye S (1995) Facet theory: form and content (advanced quantitative techniques in the social sciences). Sage Publications Inc, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  4. Canter D (ed) (1985a) Facet theory: approaches to social research. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Canter D (1985b) How to be a facet researcher. In: Canter D (ed) Facet theory: approaches to social research. Springer, New York, pp 265–276Google Scholar
  6. Casati R, Varzi AC (1999) Parts and places: the structures of spatial representation. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Cotnoir AJ, Baxter DLM (eds) (2014) Composition as identity. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  8. Czleakowski J, Rickey VF, Srzednicki JJT (eds) (2013) Leśniewski’s Systems: Ontology and Mereology (Nijhoff International Philosophy Series) New York, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  9. Gadamer HG (2004) Truth and method (Wahrheit und Methode). Crossroad, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Guttman L (1947) Scale and intensity analysis for attitude, opinion and achievement. In: Kelly GA (ed) New methods in applied psychology: proceedings of the Maryland conference on military contributions to methodology in applied psychology held at the University of Maryland, Nov 27–28, 1945, under the auspices of the Military Division of the American Psychological Association. College Park, University of Maryland, MDGoogle Scholar
  11. Hackett PMW (2013) Fine art and perceptual neuroscience: field of vision and the painted grid. Psychology Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Hackett PMW (2014) Facet theory and the mapping sentence: evolving philosophy, use and application. Palgrave, BasingstokeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hackett PMW (2016a) Facet theory and the mapping sentence as hermeneutically consistent structured meta-ontology and structured meta-mereology. Front Psychol Philos Theor Psychol 7:471. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00471 Google Scholar
  14. Hackett PMW (2016b) Psychology and philosophy of abstract art: neuro-aesthetics, perception and comprehension. Palgrave, BasingstokeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harte V (2002) Plato on parts and wholes: the metaphysics of structure. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heidegger M (2008) Being and time. Harper Perennial Modern Classics, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Kleinschmidt S (ed) (2014) Mereology and location. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  18. Koval E, Hackett PMW (2015) Hermeneutic consistency, structured ontology and mereology as embodied in facet theory and the mapping sentence. Paper presented at the fourteenth international facet theory conference, Fordham University, New York City, USA, 16–19th Aug 2015Google Scholar
  19. Levy S (ed) (1994) Louis Guttman on theory and methodology: selected writings. Dartmouth (Dartmouth Benchmark Series), AldershotGoogle Scholar
  20. Lowe EG (2007) The four-category ontology: a metaphysical foundation for natural science. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Paul LA, Hall N (2013) Causation: a user’s guide. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shelley J (2015) The concept of the aesthetic. The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Winter 2015 Edition). In: Edward N Alta (ed). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/aesthetic-concept/
  23. Shye S (ed) (1978) Theory construction and data analysis in the behavioral sciences. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  24. Shye S, Amar R (1985) Partial-order scalogram analysis by base coordinates and lattice mapping of the items by their scalogram roles. In: Canter D (ed) Facet theory: approaches to social research. Springer, New York, pp 277–298Google Scholar
  25. Shye S, Elizur D (1994) Introduction to facet theory: content design and intrinsic data analysis in behavioral research (applied social research methods). Sage Publications Inc, Thousand OaksCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Simons P (1987) Parts. A study in ontology. Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Walton KL (1970) Categories of art. Philos Rev, 79(3):334–367. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2183933

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of CommunicationEmerson CollegeBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations