Aesthetic Supervenience vs. Aesthetic Grounding

Estetika 49 (2):166–178 (2012)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The claim that the having of aesthetic properties supervenes on the having of non-aesthetic properties has been widely discussed and, in various ways, defended. In this paper, I will show that even if it is sometimes true that a supervenience relation holds between aesthetic properties and the 'subvenient' non-aesthetic ones, it is not the interesting relation in the neighbourhood. As we shall see, a richer, asymmetric and irreflexive relation is required, and I shall defend the claim that the more-and-more-popular relation of grounding does a much better job than supervenience.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
BENASV
Revision history
Archival date: 2013-08-01
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
On What Grounds What.Schaffer, Jonathan
.LePore, Ernest & McLaughlin, Brian P. (eds.)

View all 22 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Primitive Directionality and Diachronic Grounding.Kajimoto, Naoyuki; Miller, Kristie & Norton, James

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2012-10-11

Total views
365 ( #8,477 of 41,573 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
100 ( #4,640 of 41,573 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.