Abstract
Aesthetics plays a central role in human life. Given its ubiquity across cultures, there is no shortage of theories about its origin, function, underlying mechanisms, purpose, and so on. While we applaud the diversity of these approaches and their commitment to shedding light on this mysterious and abstract conceptual domain, many of them are unabashedly top-down, centering on the role of higher-order, reason-based assumptions about how the mind works. In contrast to this view, over the past decade, findings across the cognitive sciences have provided considerable support for the thesis that cognition is fundamentally grounded in sensorimotor and perceptual states. The now popular view of embodied cognition – a species of grounded cognition – has energized many of the creative insights that have helped breathe life into traditionally intractable cognitive problems (e.g., symbol grounding). However, insightful critics like Mahon and Caramazza (J Physiol 102:59–70, 2008) and Dove (Cognition 110:412–431, 2009) have argued that grounded accounts of cognition fail to adequately explain the representation and processing of abstract concepts like AESTHETICS, which give no unified perceptual experiences. In this chapter, we argue that aesthetics (like other abstract conceptual representations) can be accommodated by an embodied theory that uses two classes of perceptual information (sensorimotor and affective) to explain art representation, production, and evaluation.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
There were 66 total regions analyzed in this study (e.g., fusiform gyrus, caudal middle frontal cortex, inferior parietal cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, superior frontal cortex, parahippocampal cortex, etc.).
- 2.
An important exception may be the Action Painting wing of Abstract Expressionism (e.g., Jackson Pollock, Willem de Kooning, and Hans Hofmann).
- 3.
However, see Barrett’s [3] insightful review on the status of emotions as natural kinds.
- 4.
Barsalou et al. [6] research provides support for our proposed model through their Language and Situated Simulation Theory (LASS), which shows how sensorimotor information is used to process concrete concepts. According to this view, when one encounters a word, the linguistic and simulation systems are activated simultaneously. The linguistic system peaks first in activity and is responsible for categorization, spreading activation, and other shallow, word association-based processes. The simulation system peaks later and is responsible for developing concepts more deeply, which is accomplished through modality-specific simulations. Prima facie, it appears that Barsalou et al. endorse a pluralistic view of representations; however, it is important to stress that their basic thesis remains constant: the representation of conceptual meaning is fundamentally grounded in the brain’s modality-specific systems.
References
Anderson, J.A. 1987. Skill acquisition: Compilation of weak-method problem solutions. Psychological Review 94: 194–210.
Anderson, M.L. 2010. Neural reuse: A fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33: 245–313.
Barrett, L.F. 2006. Are emotions natural kinds? Perspectives on Psychological Science 1: 28–58.
Barsalou, L.W. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 577–660.
Barsalou, L.W. 2008. Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 59: 617–645.
Barsalou, L.W., A. Santos, W.K. Simmons, and C.D. Wilson. 2009. Language and simulation in conceptual processing. In Symbols and embodiment: Debates on meaning and cognition, ed. M. De Vega, A.M. Glenberg, and A.C. Graesser, 245–283. New York: Oxford University Press.
Baumgarten, A.G. 1735/1988. Theoretische Aesthetik. Die grundlegenden Abschnitte der ‘Aesthetica’ [Theoretical aesthetics. Essential parts of the “aesthetica”]. Hamburg: H.R. Schweizer.
Bechara, A., H. Damasio, A.R. Damasio, and G.P. Lee. 1999. Different contributions of the human amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex to decision-making. Journal of Neuroscience 19: 5473–5481.
Bechara, A., D. Tranel, and H. Damasio. 2000. Characterization of the decision-making impairment of patients with bilateral lesions of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Brain 123: 2189–2202.
Berlyne, D. 1971. Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton.
Biederman, I. 1987. Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review 94: 115–147.
Biederman, I., and J.G. Kim. 2008. 17000 years of depicting the junction of two smooth shapes. Perception 37: 161–164.
Boroditsky, L., and J. Prinz. 2008. What thoughts are made of. In Embodied grounding: Social, cognitive, affective, and neuroscientific approaches, ed. G.R. Semin and E.R. Smith, 98–115. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bower, G.H. 1970. Imagery as a relational organizer in associative learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 9: 529–533.
Brown, S., X. Gao, L. Tisdelle, S.B. Eickhoff, and M. Liotti. 2011. Naturalizing aesthetics: Brain areas for aesthetic appraisal across sensory modalities. NeuroImage 58: 250–258.
Burke, E. 2008. A philosophical inquiry into the origin of our ideas of the sublime and beautiful, ed. A. Philips. New York: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1757)
Cennini, C.d’A. early fifteenth century/1954. The Craftsman’s Handbook (Il Libro dell’Arte). Trans. D.V. Thompson Jr. New York: Dover.
Chatterjee, A. 2011. Neuroaesthetics: A coming of age story. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 23: 53–62.
Clark, A. 1997. Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Clore, G.L. 2009. Affect as information. In The Oxford companion to emotion and the affective sciences, ed. D. Sander and K. Scherer, 122–141. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, D.J., and S. Bennett. 1997. Why can’t most people draw what they see? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 23: 609–621.
Damasio, A.R. 1994. Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Grosset/Putnam.
Di Dio, C., and V. Gallese. 2009. Neuroaesthetics: A review. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 19: 682–687.
Dove, G. 2009. Beyond perceptual symbols: A call for representational pluralism. Cognition 110: 412–431.
Eskine, K.J., N.A. Kacinik, and J.J. Prinz. 2012. Stirring images: Fear, not happiness or arousal, makes art more sublime. Emotion 12(5): 1071–1074.
Eskine, K.J., N.A. Kacinik, and G.D. Webster. 2012. The bitter truth about morality: Virtue, not vice, makes a bland beverage taste nice. PLoS ONE 7(7): e41159.
Eskine, K.J., and C. Lambert. in preparation. Experts utilize emotions differently than non-experts during aesthetic judgment.
Fechner, G.T. 1876. Vorschule der Aesthetik [Experimental Aesthetics; “Pre-school” of Aesthetics]. Leipzig: Breitkopf and Härtel.
Freedberg, D., and V. Gallese. 2007. Motion, emotion, and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends in Cognitive Science 11: 197–203.
Fry, R. 1919/1960. Vision and design. New York: Meridian Books.
Gombrich, E.H. 1960. Art and illusion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gombrich, E.H. 1995. The story of art, 16th ed. London: Phaidon.
Haidt, J. 2001. The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review 108: 814–834.
Hume, D. 1739/1978. In A treatise of human nature, ed. P.H. Nidditch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ijzerman, H., and S.L. Koole. 2011. From perceptual rags to metaphoric riches—Bodily, social, and cultural constraints on sociocognitive metaphors: Comment on Landau, Meier, and Keefer (2010). Psychological Bulletin 137: 355–361.
Jacobsen, T., R.I. Schubotz, L. Höfel, and D.Y.V. Cramon. 2006. Brain correlates of aesthetic judgment of beauty. NeuroImage 29: 276–285.
Kandinsky, W. 2006/1911. Concerning the spiritual in art. Boston: MFA Publications.
Kawabata, H., and S. Zeki. 2004. Neural correlates of beauty. Journal of Neurophysiology 91: 1699–1705.
Kosslyn, S.M. 1973. Scanning visual images: Some structural implications. Perception & Psychophysics 14: 90–94.
Kosslyn, S.M. 1978. Measuring the visual angle of the mind’s eye. Cognitive Psychology 10: 356–389.
Kosslyn, S.M. 1996. Image and brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kousta, S.T., G. Vigliocco, D.P. Vinson, M. Andrews, and E. Del Campo. 2011. The representation of abstract words: Why emotion matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 140: 14–34.
Kozbelt, A. 2001. Artists as experts in visual cognition. Visual Cognition 8: 705–723.
Kozbelt, A. 2006. Psychological implications of the history of realistic depiction: Ancient Greece, Renaissance Italy, and CGI. Leonardo 39: 139–144.
Kozbelt, A. 2009. Ontogenetic heterochrony and the creative process in visual art: A précis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 3: 35–37.
Kozbelt, A., A. Seidel, A. ElBassiouny, Y. Mark, and D.R. Owen. 2010. Visual selection contributes to artists’ advantages in representational drawing. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 4: 93–102.
Kozbelt, A., and J.C. Kaufman. 2014. Aesthetics assessment. To appear in: The Cambridge handbook of aesthetics, ed. J.K. Smith and P. Tinio. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kozbelt, A., and W.P. Seeley. 2007. Integrating art historical, psychological, and neuroscientific explanations of artists’ advantages in drawing and perception. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 1: 80–90.
Lakoff, G., and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., and M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Landau, M.J., B.P. Meier, and L.A. Keefer. 2010. A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin 136: 1045–1067.
Leder, H., S. Bär, and S. Topolinski. 2012. Covert painting simulations influence aesthetic appreciation of artworks. Psychological Science 23(12): 1479–1481.
Lee, S.W.S., and N. Schwarz. 2012. Bidirectionality, mediation, and moderation of metaphorical effects: The embodiment of social suspicion and fishy smells. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 103(5): 737–749.
Levinson, J. (ed.). 2003. The Oxford handbook of aesthetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Locher, P.J. 2003. An empirical investigation of the visual rightness theory of picture perception. Acta Psychologica 114: 147–164.
Locke, J. 1690/1979. In An essay concerning human understanding, ed. P.H. Nidditch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mahon, B.Z., and A. Caramazza. 2008. A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. Journal of Physiology 102: 59–70.
Marr, D., and H.K. Nishihara. 1978. Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three dimensional structure. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 200: 269–294.
Meier, B.P., and M.D. Robinson. 2004. Why the sunny side is up: Associations between affect and vertical position. Psychological Science 15: 243–247.
Melcher, D., and P. Cavanagh. 2011. Pictorial cues in art and in perception. In Art and the senses, ed. F. Bacci and D. Melcher, 359–394. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Niedenthal, P.M., L.W. Barsalou, P. Winkielman, S. Krauth-Gruber, and F. Ric. 2005. Embodiment in attitudes, social perception, and emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review 9: 184–211.
Nöth, W. 1990. Handbook of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Ostrofsky, J., A. Kozbelt, and A. Seidel. 2012. Perceptual constancies and visual selection as predictors of realistic drawing skill. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 6: 124–136.
Paivio, A. 1986. Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Perdreau, F., and P. Cavanagh. 2011. Do artists see their retinas? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 171: 1–10.
Prinz, J.J. 2002. Furnishing the mind: Concepts and their perceptual basis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Prinz, J.J., and L.W. Barsalou. 2000. Steering a course for embodied representation. In Cognitive dynamics: Conceptual change in humans and machines, ed. E. Dietrich and A. Markman, 51–77. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pylyshyn, Z.W. 1973. What the mind’s eye tells the mind’s brain: A critique of mental imagery. Psychological Bulletin 80: 1–24.
Ruskin, J. 1857/1971. The elements of drawing. Mineola: Dover.
Schubert, T. 2005. Your highness: Vertical positions as perceptual symbols of power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89: 1–21.
Schwarz, N., and G.L. Clore. 1983. Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45: 513–523.
Schwarz, N., and G.L. Clore. 1998. How do I feel about it? informative functions of affective states. In Affect, cognition and social behavior, ed. K. Fiedler and J. Forgas, 44–62. Toronto: Hogrefe International.
Shepard, R.N., and J. Metzler. 1971. Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science 171: 701–703.
Shimamura, A.P., and S.E. Palmer (eds.). 2012. Aesthetic science: Connecting minds, brains, and experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Slepian, M.L., E.J. Masicampo, N.R. Toosi, and N. Ambady. 2012. The physical burdens of secrecy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 141: 619–624.
Tse, P.U., and P. Cavanagh. 2000. Chinese and Americans see opposite apparent motions in a Chinese character. Cognition 74: B27–B32.
Vartanian, O., and V. Goel. 2004. Emotion pathways in the brain mediate aesthetic preference. Bulletin of Psychology and Arts 5: 37–42.
Varela, F.J., E. Thompson, and E. Rosch. 1991. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Willats, J. 1997. Art and representation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Eskine, K.J., Kozbelt, A. (2015). Art That Moves: Exploring the Embodied Basis of Art Representation, Production, and Evaluation. In: Scarinzi, A. (eds) Aesthetics and the Embodied Mind: Beyond Art Theory and the Cartesian Mind-Body Dichotomy. Contributions To Phenomenology, vol 73. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9379-7_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9379-7_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9378-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9379-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)