Biology and Philosophy

, Volume 20, Issue 2–3, pp 291–304 | Cite as

Ellen Dissanayake’s Evolutionary Aesthetic

Article

Abstract

Dissanayake argues that art behaviors – which she characterizes first as patterns or syndromes of creation and response and later as rhythms and modes of mutuality – are universal, innate, old, and a source of intrinsic pleasure, these being hallmarks of biological adaptation. Art behaviors proved to enhance survival by reinforcing cooperation, interdependence, and community, and, hence, became selected for at the genetic level. Indeed, she claims that art is essential to the fullest realization of our human nature. I make three criticisms: Dissanayake’s theory cannot account adequately for differences in the aesthetic value of artworks; the connections drawn between art and reproductive success are too stretched to account for art's production, nature, and reception; indeed, art enters the picture only because it is so thinly characterized that it remains in doubt that her topic is art as we understand it.

Key words

Adaptation Aesthetic Art Community Dissanayake ‘Making special’ Mutuality Play Ritual Value 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Davies, S. 2000

    ‘Non-western art and art’s definition’

    Carroll, N. eds. Theories of Art TodayUniversity of Wisconsin PressMadison199216
    Google Scholar
  2. Dissanayake, E. 1988What is Art for?University of Washington PressSeattleGoogle Scholar
  3. Dissanayake, E. 1995Homo Aestheticus: Where Art Comes from and WhyUniversity of Washington PressSeattleGoogle Scholar
  4. Dissanayake, E. 1998℈Komar and Melamid discover pleistocene taste’Philosophy and Literature22486496Google Scholar
  5. Dissanayake, E. 2000Art and Intimacy: How the Arts BeganUniversity of Washington PressSeattleGoogle Scholar
  6. Dutton, D. 2003

    ‘Universalismevolutionary psychology, and aesthetics’

    Davies, S.Sukla, A.C. eds. Art and EssencePraegerWestport213226
    Google Scholar
  7. Miller, G. 2000The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution of Human NatureDoubledayLondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Orians, G.H., Heerwagen, J.H. 1992

    ‘Evolved responses to landscapes’

    Barkow, J.H.Cosmides, L.Tooby, J. eds. The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of CultureOxford University PressNew York555579
    Google Scholar
  9. Shiner, L. 2001The Invention of Art: A Cultural HistoryUniversity of Chicago PressChicagoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations