Repository logo
 
Publication

De Pulchritudine non est Disputandum? A cross-cultural investigation of the alleged intersubjective validity of aesthetic judgment

dc.contributor.authorCova, Florian
dc.contributor.authorOlivola, Christopher Y.
dc.contributor.authorMachery, Edouard
dc.contributor.authorStich, Stephen
dc.contributor.authorRose, David
dc.contributor.authorAlai, Mario
dc.contributor.authorAngelucci, Adriano
dc.contributor.authorBerniūnas, Renatas
dc.contributor.authorBuchtel, Emma E.
dc.contributor.authorChatterjee, Amita
dc.contributor.authorCheon, Hyundeuk
dc.contributor.authorCho, In Rae
dc.contributor.authorCohnitz, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorDranseika, Vilius
dc.contributor.authorLagos, Ángeles E.
dc.contributor.authorGhadakpour, Laleh
dc.contributor.authorGrinberg, Maurice
dc.contributor.authorHannikainen, Ivar
dc.contributor.authorHashimoto, Takaaki
dc.contributor.authorHorowitz, Amir
dc.contributor.authorHristova, Evgeniya
dc.contributor.authorJraissati, Yasmina
dc.contributor.authorKadreva, Veselina
dc.contributor.authorKarasawa, Kaori
dc.contributor.authorKim, Hackjin
dc.contributor.authorKim, Yeonjeong
dc.contributor.authorLee, Minwoo
dc.contributor.authorMauro, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorMizumoto, Masaharu
dc.contributor.authorMoruzzi, Sebastiano
dc.contributor.authorOrnelas, Jorge
dc.contributor.authorOsimani, Barbara
dc.contributor.authorRomero, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorRosas, Alejandro
dc.contributor.authorSangoi, Massimo
dc.contributor.authorSereni, Andrea
dc.contributor.authorSonghorian, Sarah
dc.contributor.authorSousa, Paulo
dc.contributor.authorStruchiner, Noel
dc.contributor.authorTripodi, Vera
dc.contributor.authorUsui, Naoki
dc.contributor.authorMercado, Alejandro V. del
dc.contributor.authorVolpe, Giorgio
dc.contributor.authorVosgerichian, Hrag A.
dc.contributor.authorZhang, Xueyi
dc.contributor.authorZhu, Jing
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-22T11:05:06Z
dc.date.available2023-02-22T11:05:06Z
dc.date.issued2019-06
dc.description.abstractSince at least Hume and Kant, philosophers working on the nature of aesthetic judgment have generally agreed that common sense does not treat aesthetic judgments in the same way as typical expressions of subjective preferences—rather, it endows them with intersubjective validity, the property of being right or wrong regardless of disagreement. Moreover, this apparent intersubjective validity has been taken to constitute one of the main explananda for philosophical accounts of aesthetic judgment. But is it really the case that most people spontaneously treat aesthetic judgments as having intersubjective validity? In this paper, we report the results of a cross-cultural study with over 2,000 respondents spanning 19 countries. Despite significant geographical variations, these results suggest that most people do not treat their own aesthetic judgments as having intersubjective validity. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for theories of aesthetic judgment and the purpose of aesthetics in general.pt_PT
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionpt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/mila.12210pt_PT
dc.identifier.eid85052377077
dc.identifier.issn0268-1064
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.14/40314
dc.identifier.wos000471283500003
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.subjectAesthetic judgmentpt_PT
dc.subjectAesthetic realismpt_PT
dc.subjectCross-culturalpt_PT
dc.subjectExperimental philosophypt_PT
dc.titleDe Pulchritudine non est Disputandum? A cross-cultural investigation of the alleged intersubjective validity of aesthetic judgmentpt_PT
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage338pt_PT
oaire.citation.issue3pt_PT
oaire.citation.startPage317pt_PT
oaire.citation.titleMind and Languagept_PT
oaire.citation.volume34pt_PT
rcaap.rightsopenAccesspt_PT
rcaap.typearticlept_PT

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
20231368.pdf
Size:
522.01 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
3.44 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: