On Perspectivism and Expressivism
A Reply to Ted Nannicelli
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11514352 |
|---|---|
| Authors | James Harold (Mount Holyoke College, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 62 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 587-596 |
| Publication date | 2022-05-09 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The British Journal of Aesthetics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0904 • E-ISSN: 1468-2842 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/aesthj/ayac030 |
| OpenAlex | W4285135292 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 8 |
I am grateful for Ted Nannicelli’s careful attention to my book. In his comment, Nannicelli makes two quite serious sets of objections to my views. The first set concerns my arguments against perspectivism, the view that the attitudes or perspectives manifested in artworks are morally evaluable. The second set concerns my arguments for meta-normative expressivism, the view that normative judgements are expressions of the attitudes of persons, not beliefs in mind-independent facts. In what follows, I offer responses to each of these sets of objections, which I hope will go some way towards answering them. If my responses fail to fully answer the objections, perhaps they can at least shed further light on the reasons behind our disagreements. For the most part, I stand behind what I wrote, but Nannicelli’s criticisms have helped me to see the ways in which I might have said more to support certain points and in which I might have been clearer. I hope this short response can make clear what I was trying to do in the book and why I was trying to do it
Agnosticism · Epistemology · Expressivism · Normative · Perspectivism · Set (abstract data type · Aesthetic Perception and Analysis · Computer Science · Ethics, Aesthetics, and Art · Philosophy · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
| Highly cited | No |
|---|