Abstract
According to Roy Sorensen [Philosophical Studies 100 (2000) 175–191] an object cannot differ aesthetically from its mirror image. On his view, mirror-reversing an object–changing its left/right orientation–cannot bring about any aesthetic change. However, in arguing for this thesis Sorensen assumes that aesthetic properties supervene on intrinsic properties alone. This is a highly controversial assumption and nothing is offered in its support. Moreover, a plausible weakening of the assumption does not improve the argument. Finally, Sorensen's second argument is shown to be formally flawed. As a result, the case for the aesthetic irrelevancy of orientation seems still open.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 553-563 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition |
| Volume | 132 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Feb 2007 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'A note on the aesthetics of mirror reversal'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver