Aesthetic Properties

Aesthetic properties such as gracefulness, garishness, and unity are features we perceive in objects that depend on, but are not reducible to, their ordinary physical properties.

Definition

Aesthetic properties are features such as elegance, balance, garishness, or delicacy that an object possesses in virtue of, and that depend upon, its non-aesthetic properties, but whose apprehension requires taste rather than the mere application of rules.

Scope

This topic covers the nature of aesthetic properties: their dependence (supervenience) on non-aesthetic features, the role of taste and perceptual discrimination in apprehending them, the question of whether they are objective or response-dependent, and the way perceived properties shift with the categories under which a work is perceived. It treats Sibley's analysis of aesthetic concepts and Walton's argument about categories. It does not cover the broader debate over aesthetic experience or the normativity of judgment, treated in sibling topics.

Core questions

• How do aesthetic properties depend on non-aesthetic ones?
• Can rules specify when an object has a given aesthetic property?
• Are aesthetic properties objective features or projections of response?
• How does the category under which a work is perceived affect its aesthetic properties?

Key theories

Non-condition-governedness of aesthetic concepts

Sibley argues that no set of non-aesthetic conditions is sufficient for an aesthetic property: deciding whether a work is graceful requires taste, a perceptual sensitivity, not the application of features-to-rules.

Category-relativity of aesthetic properties

Walton argues that which aesthetic properties a work has depends on the category (medium, genre, period) in which it is correctly perceived, so that the same configuration can be serene in one category and lifeless in another.

History

Sibley's 1959 paper reframed the study of aesthetic qualities by arguing that aesthetic concepts are governed by taste rather than rules, sparking decades of work on whether aesthetic properties supervene on, are entailed by, or are merely dependent on the non-aesthetic. Walton's 1970 essay added the influential thesis that perceived aesthetic properties are relative to the categories a work belongs to, linking aesthetic perception to art history and the artist's intentions.

Debates

Realism vs. response-dependence

Whether aesthetic properties are mind-independent features of objects or constitutively involve human responses remains a central metaethics-style dispute within aesthetics.

Perceptual vs. relational aesthetic properties

Walton's category-relativity suggests aesthetic properties are not fixed by what is immediately seen, challenging the idea that they are wholly perceptual.

Key figures

• Frank Sibley
• Kendall Walton
• Jerrold Levinson
• Alan Goldman

Seminal works

• sibley1959
• walton1970

Frequently asked questions

Do aesthetic properties follow from physical properties by rule?

Sibley argues they do not: while aesthetic properties depend on non-aesthetic features, no rule lets you infer 'graceful' or 'gaudy' from a list of colors and shapes; apprehending them takes taste.

How can the same object have different aesthetic properties?

On Walton's account, the aesthetic properties a work has depend on the category it is perceived in; perceived as a painting it may seem dynamic, perceived as a relief it may seem flat, so categorization changes which properties appear.