Cognitive Aesthetics

8/21/2019 Cognitive Aesthetics

1/41

Renáa KišoňováEdícia kogniívne šúdia

Cogniive Aesheics


2/41

Renáa KišoňováEdícia kogniívne šúdia

Cogniive Aesheics


3/41

Peer reviewers

Pro. PhDr. Silvia Gáliková, CSc.Mgr. Jaroslav Šajgalík, Ph.D.

Ediorial Board

Doc. Andrej Démuh ∙ Trnavská univerziaPro. Jose Dolisa ∙ Trnavská univerziaPro. Silvia Gáliková ∙ Trnavská univerziaPro. Peer Gärdenors ∙ Lunds UniversieDr. Richard Gray ∙ Card iff UniversiyDoc. Marek Perů ∙ Univerzia Palackého ∙ OlomoucDr. Adrián Slavkovský ∙ Trnavská univerzia

The publicaion o his book is par o he projec Innovaive Forms of Educaion in Transform- ing Universiy Educaion (code ) — preparaion o a sudy program Cogniive Sud-ies, which was suppored by he European Union via is European Social Fund and by he SlovakMinisry o Educaion wihin he Operaing Program Educaion. The ex was prepared in heCenre o Cogniive Sudies a he Deparmen o Philosophy, Faculy o Philosophy in Trnava.

© Renáa Kišoňová ∙ © Towarzyswo Słowaków w Polsce ∙ Kraków ∙ © Filozofická akula Trnavskej univerziy v Trnave ∙ ISBN ––––

. Inroducion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Clarificaion of Terms. Hisorical Excursus . . . . . . .. Eymology o he Term Aesheics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Hisorical Excursus o Cogniive Aesheics . . . . . . .. Aesheics as Inuiive Cogniion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Aesheics as Inenional Cogniion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Ar as Hermeneuic Cogniion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Oher Maniesaions

o Cogniivism in Classical Aesheics . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Aesheic Percepion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Percepion — Appercepion — Response . . . . . . . . . . .. Appercepion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Tase. Types of Aesheic Percepion . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Tase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Types o Aesheic Percepion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Sponaneiy o Percepion o a Work o Ar . . . . . . . .

. Creaion of a Work of Ar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Types o Aesheic Creaion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sages o Arisic Creaion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Creaor’s Personaliy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Arisic Apiude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Conen


4/41

In he presened universiy exbook called Cogniive Aesheics weare o deal wih a specific field o aesheics which has no been un-

equivocally deermined and differen inerpreaion, mehodologyand significance are assigned o i by a number o auhors. There-ore, i would be appropriae o deermine he field o cogniiveaesheics o a reader righ a he beginning. Wha does i acuallymean i a cerain approach in he field o aesheics is cogniive?

One group o aesheicians (or insance Nick Zangwill) assumeha an aesheic judgemen can be rue or alse. On he oherhand, ohers asser ha a value o aesheics is cogniive isel:i means ha we creae, perceive and are ond o works o ar be-cause we can ge o know somehing hrough hem. Such approachcan be ound, or insance, in an aesheic heory o Noël Carrollor Nelson Goodman (alhough a litle differen one). Ye, wha wecognise hanks o ar is ambiguous and remains a subjec o dis-pues. This meaning o cogniive aesheics we are o develop inhe firs chaper o he presened ex. Moreover, in he field o

conemporary aesheics we can come across such erms as empirical or scienific aesheics. I is a discipline whose plaorm is nocompleely philosophical anymore; i applies also exac sciencesor soluion o issues and works wih oucomes o experimenalresearches especially o cogniive sciences, neurosciences bu alsobiology, chemisry, ec.

From he second o fih chaper we ocus on aesheic percepion, creaion of a work of ar and creaiviy while psychology o

. Percepion of Beauy of a Human Face . . . . . . . . . . .. Male and Female Characerisics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Briefly on Specific Brain Funcions During Face Percepion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Averageness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Symmery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Oher Aspecs o Facial Atraciveness . . . . . . . . . . . .. Atraciveness During he Mensrual Cycle . . . . . . .

. Percepion of Beauy of a Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Wha do Women Like? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Wha do Men Like? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Ar and Cogniion. Ar and Neuroscience . . . . . . . .. Cogniivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Music . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Fine Ar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Curren Research Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Creaiviy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Creaiviy as a Concep . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. From he Hisory o Sudy o Creaiviy . . . . . . . . . . .. Characerisics o Creaive Persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Comprehension Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. “Reading” o a Work o Ar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. A Role o Memory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Ambiguous Inerpreaions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Significance of Beauy and Ar in our Life . . . . . . . .. Therapy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Applied Ar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Lieraure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. Inroducion


5/41

Key words: aesheics, cogniive aesheics, inenionaliy, hermeneuics

. Eymology of he Term Aesheics

Aesheics as a erm or an independen philosophical discipline

was inroduced in he work Aesthetica writen by Alexander Go-

lieb Baumgaren. Wha is an eymological definiion o aesheics?

The Greek word aisthanomai means “o perceive hrough senses”,

he subsanive aesthesis means “sense percepion” and finally he

adjecive aisthétikos is ranslaed as “relaed o sense percepion” or

“wha is perceivable”. I ollows ha Baumgaren’ s erm aesheics

means “science dealing wih sense cogniion”. However, rom Baum-

garen’ s poin o view, his “sense cogniion” does no reer only o

senses bu also covers emoions and imaginaion. For him aesheics

represens science whose subjec — beauy — is perecion o hings.

I brings pleasure only i i is perceivable by senses. According o his

definiion, we perceive beauy no by our brain bu by senses.

. Hisorical Excursus of Cogniive Aesheics

Immanuel Kan explicily reused a concep ha an aesheic judgemen would bring any knowledge abou an objec. (Kan,) During he and cenuries, oher hinkers opposedhis opinion. For insance, Baumgaren considered aesheics

ar represens a oundaion o hese researches. The sixh, sevenhand eighh chaper are dedicaed o empirical (scienific) aesheics.The las chapers discuss a problem o comprehension o a work oar and significance o ar or our lie.

. Clarificaion of Terms. Hisorical Excursus


6/41

abou exernal expression, reproducion, communicaion and oh-er pracical echniques. From Croce’ s classificaion o wo orms omenal abiliies — heoreical one consising o an aesheic andlogical orm and pracical one ino which he caegorizes an eco-nomic and ehical orm, ollows ha aesheics, according o him,has nohing in common wih pracice; i is a compleely heoreicalmater (because cogniion arises rom heory). He reuses heoriesconnecing aesheics and pracical acions, openly rejecs, and dis-approves especially o deerminaion o “moral requiremens” inhe field o ar. According o him, classificaion o works o ar inomoral and immoral is equally senseless as o hink abou a quad-

rae or a riangle as being moral or immoral. (Croce, )A picure, a sculpure or a music composiion are no immoral,

praiseworhy or conempible. When disinguishing beween ra-ional and inuiive cogniion, Croce applies a crierion o realiy— raional cogniion is realisic while inuiive cogniion does noassess wheher a music composiion or a sculpure is realisic. Hecriicises also classificaion o ar ino valuable and valueless. Leus menion also non–sandard idenificaion o a spiri o geniusand ase, i.e. creaive aciviy o an aris and reproducion aciv-iy o a consumer. In his opinion, boh o hem are paricipans oidenical inuiion. Thus, Croce can bravely declare ha percepiono a work o ar equals o aciviy o a poe, sculpor, painer, ec.

Only rarely in hisory o aesheics has pleasure arising romar been evaluaed so highly. Croce akes ino consideraion inel-ligen audience and educaed ariss; an essenial conribuion o

his aesheics is ha he spread exisence o heoreical experiencewhich is compleely independen beween he rue and alse. Thushe preserved ree characer o ar. (Perniola, )

. Aesheics as Inenional Cogniion

The Polish phenomenologis Roman Ingarden also atemped oanswer he quesion: Wha ype o cogniion does ar provide?

a par o gnoseology which deals wih sense cogniion, conraryo logic which ocuses on raional cogniion. Baumgarner deer-mines he erm beauy isel hrough objecives o aesheics — isgoal is perecion o sense comprehension because perecion rep-resens beauy. In his ex Aesheica he defined aesheics as anindependen philosophical discipline. He considers emoion o bevague, conusing cogniion whose source is inuiion. By conras,here is raional logical cogniion whose goal represens he ruh.Arhur Schopenhauer based his undersanding o ar on compre-hension o human cogniion. According o him, he purpose oar is o make cogniion o world ideas easier (in Plaonic sense).

(Schopenhauer, ) As Hegel assers, ar besides religion andphilosophy represens a momen o absolue spiri and embod-ies one o he highes maniesaions o he ruh. In his aesheicconcep beauy and ruh do no oppose each oher; beauy hasalso a cogniive uncion. Such approach prevailed in he and cenuries. Cogniive aesheics in he and cenuriesoffers a wide range o mehods, sreams and hinkers who in spieo significan dissimilariies are unied by a requiremen o assigna value o ruh o ar. (Perniola, )

. Aesheics as Inuiive Cogniion

In he cenury B. Croce made a significan mark in hisory ocogniive aesheics. In exs Aesheics as Science of Expressionand General Linguisic and Breviary of Aesheics he inroduced

his aesheic concepion in which an asserion ha inuiion andexpression are idenical and canno exis wihou each oher rep-resens he cenral heme. According o him, inuiion wihou ex-pression is inconceivable — and hus he opposes asserions claim-ing ha we are rich in inernal experience bu no able o expressi. There is nohing like ideal, pure beauy which could do wihouexpression. This proposiion o Croce does no reer o echnicalor nauralisic comprehension o ar — aesheic experience is no


7/41

be somehing supersensible. On he conrary, Harmann assersha a real ac is necessary or aesheic experience, represens isoundaion and disinguishes i rom philosophy. Excep or hisoregrounding (der Vordergrund) o a work o ar, he inroducesalso a so–called background (der Hinergrund) which is equallyobjecive as he oreground. Noneheless, i is no real; we coulddefine i more closely as “imaginaion”. Beauy hen bears in iselwo ways o explanaion — i is real on is sensuously perceivablelevel and irreal in is supersensible span. Ye, he objecive o phe-nomenological aesheics is no gnoseology — i is raher onologyo a work o ar.

. Ar as Hermeneuic Cogniion

The German hinker Hans Georg Gadamer arrived a one o hemos radical idenificaion o ar wih philosophical cogniion. Inhis ex Truh and Mehod he sharply criicised Kanian aesheicand every ype o aesheics derived rom i. Kan classified arisicexperience and employmen o criical ase ino he field o subjec-iviy and eelings. Gadamer reuses Kan’ s endency o lay oun-daions o aesheics wihou a guaranor o speculaive hinking.However, he equally rejecs also aesheics o lie and aesheicso orm (he sees boh as producs o Kan’ s aesheics). Accordingo him, he aesheics o lie is a consequence o exaggeraed wor-shipping o a subjec, lie and nauralness (Bergson). On he oherhand, he aesheics o orm considers a symbol o be a living orm

and hus i basically does no disengage rom aesheic vialism.Aesheics has o make space or hermeneuics — every percepiono ar represens an inerpreaion. Even, also every ype o finear isel is an inerpreaion, reproducion, promoion and sance.A connecion beween ar and cogniion is no subsequenly deer-mined by philosophy bu by an aris who acs as a hermeneuis.Thus Gadamer excluded any subjecive sel–will, or him herme-neuic comprehension does no represen a subjecive aciviy o

In wha sense can we, according o him, speak abou he ruh ina work o ar? In Ingarden’ s viewpoin, he ruh o ar resides inan inrinsic connecion leading o inuiive sel–presenaion. (In-garden, )

Due o Ingarden’ s phenomenological orienaion his asserionsounds paradoxically. A oundaion o a phenomenological mehodrepresens inenionaliy i.e. he opposie o auoreerence. Ingar-den helped himsel by disinguishing beween meaphysical prop-eries and a work o ar which, according o him, does no embodyan independen onological eniy. I lacks a degree o independ-ence which represens auoreerence. Ingarden’ s aesheics a-

emps o emphasize an inenional characer o a work o ar (heocuses especially on a lierary work — a paper: The Lierary Workof Ar). He divides a lierary work ino our heerogeneous layers— a vocal linguisic ormaion, meaning uni, schemaised aspecsand porrayed objecs.

In Ingarden’ s opinion, aesheic experience bears in isel cer-ain separaion rom realiy; i.e. or insance a saemen whichoccurs in a lierary (musical, fine ar, ec.) work has only a quasi judgemen characer. Also a German hinker Nicolai Harmannpondered on a cogniive characer o aesheics. He assigns hecogniive role only o aesheics as philosophical science dealingwih beauy and does no apply i eiher o a creaor or a percipi-en o a work o ar. According o him, arisic experience as suchdoes no represen means o cogniion; ar does no have anyhingin common wih cogniion, i is only an objec o cerain knowl-

edge which neiher an aris nor a user need — i is aesheics.Harmann’ s heory hus preserves he inenional characer o arwhich canno be idenified wih is objec.

Husserl’ s call o urn “o hings as such” is noable here andalong wih i Harmann leads us back o a real subjec o percep-ion, as vision which has no been ye aesheic inroduces i ous. Plao, Plainos and laer Ficino believed ha beauy is some-hing independen o percepion and a real objec; considered i o


8/41

wheher i is possible and correc o ponder on aesheics as hecogniive science? A creaor o conronaion beween aesheicand scienific experience was Nelson Goodman who assumed haar and science represen research which has exclusively a cogni-ive characer. He rejecs vialisic emoionalism — eelings con-neced wih aesheic experience are no silen and even no a allconradicory o emoions which we experience in a real lie. Ac-cording o Goodman, eelings are no in a conflic wih cogniionbecause even emoions uncions cogniively.

Recommended Lieraure

SOLSO, R.: The Psychology of Ar and he Evoluion of he Conscious Brain. The MITPress, .

an individual bu heir involvemen in a hisorical process in whichhe pas and presen converge.

. Oher Manifesaions of Cogniivism in Classical Aesheics

Oher maniesaions o cogniive aesheics includes compre-hension o ar as symbolic cogniion which was elaboraed, orinsance, by Erns Cassirer who similarly as oher already men-ioned auhors reuses vialism. In his view, cogniion never repre-sens a reflecion o exernal realiy bu coninuous consruciono symbolic srucures. Differen culural producions — science

and ar — share a cogniive uncion which should be clarified byphilosophy. Also Theodor W. Adorno’ s aesheic concep asseringha ar is also cogniion can be classified among cogniive aes-heic concepions. All aesheic problems urn ino quesions con-neced wih ruhulness o works o ar. The ruh o a work oar is oen scandalous or even incomprehensible owing o he acha a work o ar consiss o various conradicory aspecs whichcanno be overcome by peaceul, harmonious vision. A French phe-nomenologis Maurice Merleau — Pony concenraed his reason-ing on percepion i.e. an iniial momen o cogniion. He sees ar asa ruh–bearer and also philosophy can arrive a i. Ar as well asphilosophy are cogniive disciplines relying on “hings hemselves”,on experience. In he paper Eye and Mind, Merleau — Pony claimsha a painer provides visible exisence o wha vision usuallyconsiders invisible. For him vision means o ouch and be ouched.

Feelings and hinking, senses and inellec are homogenous in hecogniive uncion which leads o he hear o mater. (Merleau— Pony, )

In spie o pleny o concepions comprehending aesheicsas he cogniive discipline in which beauy is considered o bea ruh–bearer, aesheics, aesheic experience and aesheic per-cepion are requenly seen as a domain o emoions, and cogniionis compleely excluded. Thereore, i is proper o raise a quesion


9/41

. Percepion — Appercepion — Response

Alhough all erms are relaed o percepion heir conen differsin some deails. Percepion: as Démuh assers, “in English percepion denoes a process (or a resul of a process) hrough which sense

daa are seleced, organised and inerpreed in form of conscious

experience. However, a problem resides in he fac ha a Lain erm

“percepio” from which English “percepion” is coined represens in

a basic meaning “a collecion”, “collecing”, and Lain “percipcio” es-

pecially “o cach”, “o grasp”; . “o collec”; . “o accep”, “o ge”,

hus, jus hose erms evoking raher a primary conac wih realiy

han is subsequen processing.” (Démuh, , p. )Percepion is based on percepion o realiy and acquisiion

o inormaion via recepors. The firs wo percepion elemenshrough which a human being ouches culural and biological en-vironmen are percep and emoions. Emoion is elemenary andprimary and is realized only aer he percep (e.g. when perceivingmusic, he hearing organ hrough which we perceive exernal oneand sound simuli and cerain percep and heir emoions repre-sens a basic recepor).

. Appercepion

Appercepion covers psychological processes aking place ona higher level han during percepion. I is a process during whichwe grasp no only sense characer o music bu also penerae ino

is conen. During he appercepion process, we disinguish wobasic modes o percepion:

. Observaion — (percepion) o already known or ye un-known work, is econics, inernal srucure (melody, harmony,insrumens, pars, ec.). This observaion means, his cerain prop-ery o an individual as a sense o exen o observaion will help uso penerae ino he work conen, ye no sufficienly.

Key words: percepion, aesheic comprehension, appercepion, aesheic response

Aesheic percepion does no represen only sense percepion oa work o ar (or insance, only audiory lisening — audiory lis-ening wihou ineres), i.e. percepion, a he same ime, in percep-ion we also apply cogniive elemens, experiencing o he lisenedor seen and assessmen. All hese aesheic percepion elemensare ermed as aesheic response. In a creaor — percipien com-municaion sequence, a conen o ar ges uncovered and a per-cipien decodes a conen o a work o ar in order o experience iemoionally on a basis o is cogniion and explanaion (inerprea-ion, comprehension o a work o ar). Emoional experience basi-cally embodies compleion o percepion and cogniion o a work.Aesheic percepion requires a human being prepared or an aco percepion. Preparedness can be achieved eiher by consanencouners wih an areac whereby he percipien’ s evaluaion

scale improves and sabilizes, or by ocus — i.e. a conac wih arand urher hrough educaional courses. Semanisaion — searchor meaning suppors aesheic ocus, poins ou o a conen, high-lighs and semanises an arisic value o a work in order o makepercepion o a work somehing special (e.g. in preparaion or per-cepion o a work o ar, we can creae an inenional amosphereverbally or hrough environmen and draw atenion o an ac oaesheic percepion).

. Aesheic Percepion


10/41

or mos o his lie, noneheless, docors healed him. However, idid no mean ha by resoraion o a uncion o his eye hey re-sored also his abiliy o visual recogniion o he world. He wasno able o recognise basic shapes and even saic objecs causedhim rouble; ye he suffered mos when recognising picures — hewas no able o recognise eiher people or objecs in phoographs.He could no recognise a meaning and a sense o a visual represen-aion. He perceived all picures only as colourul spos. When weshowed him moionless phoographs, he did no succeed. He didno see eiher people or objecs; he did no comprehend he idea opicure. (Sacks, )

Wha we have been pondering on so ar is he phenomenono vision and percepion. When perceiving, we selec inormaionrom our surroundings which can be considered necessary romhe poin o view o perormed aciviy, while we comprehendvisual inormaion as simuli. We recognise he seen, or raherre–recognise; i.e. recogniion. In oher words, wha we see shouldmake a cerain sense o us; we should also know wha we see. Leus inroduce again a well–known example: le us imagine ha weappeared on an unknown plane. Our vision would ideniy cer-ain objecs wihin a field o percep by grouping. I would cenrea visual field o a figure or figures and background and we woulddisinguish various shapes and colours or space–ime characeris-ics and moions. (Kulka, ) However, he problem resides in heac ha we would no know wha we see. Some objecs, shapes,colours would remind us o somehing. We would creae visual

hypoheses. We use hem o orien in everyday lie excep or heac ha we are used o idenified objecs, hey are amiliar o usand relaively unchangeable. According o A. Démuh, he processo percepion o colours is similar: i seems ha i an individualpercep o colours is decided (excep or oher aspecs) mainly viameans o is processing by individual recepors and mechanisms obrain or reina (a colour is no necessarily compleely deerminedonly by a wavelengh o alling ligh) and even a percep o colour

. Tuning ino a work o ar (or insance ino music) — o pu ipoeically, we le ourselves be revealed in ar (music), le ourselvesgo, ge carried away, plunge ino i and so on (e.g. embodimen omusic by a musical inerpreaion, inerpreaion o a song ha isvery amiliar o us, ec.).

These wo essenial modes creae a prerequisie or evaluaion judgemens o perceived works, assessmen o heir econics, con-en bu as well inerpreaion. They become he firs aspec o pro-cessual aciviy o an individual ermed as aesheic percepion.

In he ollowing ex we will atemp o skech a problem o aes-

heic percepion rom a perspecive o knowledge coming romhe psychology o ar. Ar is no creaed only by a painer bu o-geher wih him also by he one who looks a his picures. (Mikš,) I we wan o speak abou arisic or more precisely aesheicpercepion, we always have o bear in our minds ha i is a processwhich is composed no only o picures bu also o heir “reading”.(Mikš, ) In Ar and Illusion, Erns H. Gombrich menions rea-soning rom Philosraus’ Lie o Apollonius o Tyana. A neo–Py-hagorean philosopher Apollonius discusses a role o ar wih hissuden Damis and in he debae reminding o a Socraean dialoguehey come o a conclusion ha here are wo ypes o mimeic ar:“One lies in use o hands and mind hrough which we creae imia-ions and he second one in creaion o images in mind isel.” (Fla-vios, , –) A percipien looking a a picure has o havehe abiliy o imaginaion because no one would praise a pained

horse or bull i he did no have an image o an animal which heyresemble in his mind. (Flavios, ) And ha is he problem weare ineresed in — everyhing wha we “see” in picures dependson our abiliy o (re)cognise i in images which we have in ourminds. As Gombrich assumes, i an aris atemps o make us seehe visible world in his works, he will always rely on percipien’ sknowledge and he aculy o imaginaion. There is a well–knowncase o a neurologis Oliver Sacks: fiy–year old Virgil was blind


11/41

I considered i o be a picure o Canalleo and I was approaching ieagerly in expecaion ha I would eas my eyes closely on beaui-ul deails on Veneian boas and gondolas, spars, buckles, shoesor eahers on has ha Canalleo did no spare. A mixed mob opeople moving on Dresden bridge in sunny ligh promised enoughcosumes and wagons, ye when I approached i, he deails abouwhich I could have sworn ha I saw vanished beore my eyes.There were skilully arranged colourul spos in he picure visiblerom a close disance. (Dennet, )

These flecks reminded Dennet o people wih hands, legs andcosumes and his brain (equally as a brain o any o us) acceped

i. Wha does i mean? Wha did his brain do? Dennet offers heanswer ha he brain did no perorm any visual inerpreaion.Belloto provided a litle bi o colour o a percipien in order omake him see and i seems ha he couned wih our suggesibiliy,he ac ha our brain would chea. (Dennet, )

There is one anecdoe abou he French impressionis Monewho came o London and pained a picure o he well–known Lon-don og which increased a level o emoions and ouraged is cii-zens, because he og was pained in pink. “Bu our og is grey” op-posed he Londoners. When hey ook a closer look, hey realisedand or he firs ime saw ha he og had a shade o lilac. The aruncovered a colour where people saw only greyness.

In Hyughe’ s opinion, we can decipher, comprehend or simplysee a work o ar and is conen given o i by an aris only whenwe are able o approach i as a complicaed whole which represens

every picure: o a shallow percipien i migh seem ha i is suffi-cien o recognise a similariy wih known realiy and he enerainshimsel by comparison o one wih he oher. However, he vieweris soon insruced by inuiion ha every picure embodies a sym-bol and ha excep or similariy and beauy also a race o a soulcan be ound in i equally as in every human ace. I is he soul halinks all menioned elemens ino a work o fine ar by an invis-ible ie. Wha Huyghe ermed “a soul” is basically he goal o our

can be influenced also by expecaion isel or is previous percep-ion... i is hen appropriae o raise a quesion wheher a colour isreal or only our subjecive opic illusion. (Démuh, ) Compre-hension o he seen akes place on he basis o srucuring o hefield o percep and hrough percepion effecs.

Aesheic percepion (especially when modern works are con-sidered) assumes high creaive aciviy o a percipien which ischaracerisic o promp ormaion o a visual hypohesis, heirquick verificaion and acive resrucuraion o a visual model.Wha are he sources o visual hypoheses? I is quie simple wih“ordinary vision” — we orm visual hypoheses on he basis o vari-

ous sympoms we saw and according o our expecaions. Thus, wecan say ha we see wha we expec o see. However, is i also validor unclear siuaions (so e.g. during aesheic percepion o a mod-ern work o ar)? We assume ha i is valid especially or hem.A visual hypohesis subsequenly inervenes ino srucuring ohe field o percep again and resrucuring akes place. Sympomso visual objecs usually correspond o our expecaions.

Percepion and vision almos always ake place in a cerain con-ex. I he conex is no given and expecaions are no creaed,a sense, meaning o he seen is ormed as in he case o reversiblefigures. However, i we are in a amiliar environmen, our visionis auomaic and chooses only hose iems rom our surroundingswhich i necessarily requires.

I we appeared in a compleely unknown environmen wewould hen realize how complicaed a menal process o vision is.

We would probably lose he abiliy o visual orienaion. And i ishis phenomenon we encouner when perceiving a fine ar are-ac. (Kulka, )

However, le us have a look a wha is going on during percep-ion o a work o ar, or insance, during a look a a picure. In TheMysery o Consciousness, Daniel Dennet describes his personalexperience: when I was looking a Belloto’ s view o Dresden ona remoe wall o The Norh Carolina Museum o Ar in Raleigh,


12/41

— i i is possible, realisaion o he auhor’ s “work” creaive me-hod (cogniion o a process how a work was creaed deepens iscomprehension, noneheless does no represen a condiion).(Kulka, )Aer he shor explicaion o communicaion uning, le us

go back o he explanaion o a meaning o he erm decoding. Iis a phase o aesheic percepion o a work o ar represeninga ransiion rom perceived images o heir meaning and sense.Decoding is a presumpion o comprehension o a work o ar.When we perceive an arisic areac, a firs we become aware ois sense appearance — we see colours, shapes and moions, hear

sounds. From his zero layer o aesheic percepion we move ohe firs layer — realisaion o meanings o several paricular signs(e.g. rees and grass on a landscape paining). Decoding commencesalready on he zero meaning layer, however is real domain is jushe firs meaning level o a work. Decoding is no erminaed byrecogniion o simple meanings, i moves urher — o a highermeaning layer where semanemes originae. In a similar way, in-erpreaion originaes already on he lowes meaning layers. Thisinerpreaion phase provides meaning o wha an arisic areacdeclares (a produc o decoding).

O course, in everyday lie we inerpre phenomena absoluelyeverywhere, or insance: I is raining. Inerpreaion: my gardenwill be waered or I do no have an umbrella, I will become we,and so on. Inerpreaion differs rom decoding by he ac ha iaffecs all ypes o arisic signs bu also ges beyond hem, ino

a deph. Inerpreaion is virually he las sep o relaive comple-ion o an ideal arisic model — complees aesheic experiencerom a work. I arises no only rom wha we hear and see bu alsorom a whole diapason o experiences and a se o images whichan arisic objec arouses in us. During percepion o a work a so–called associaion mechanism enriching conen o aesheic objec is launched. An associaion abiliy o psyche resides in he acha i can connec is conens variously, i.e. i can associae ino

research. The goal o aesheic percepion is ormaion and sruc-uring o an aesheic objec in a percipien’ s consciousness wha,according o a psychologis Kulka, brings him beyond boundarieso ordinary sense reflecion o realiy. The objec appears graduallyand is final appearance is no idenical wih a given work o ar al-hough i arises rom i. A his poin i is necessary o horoughlydisinguish aesheic percepion rom he ordinary one. No onlya sense image (percepion) bu also cogniive processing (cogni-ion), experience (emoions) and assessmen are considered o berequired and consiuive elemens o aesheic percepion.

Excep or experiences and assessmen represening an inegra-

ed par o aesheic percepion, i is necessary o ake ino consid-

eraion a se o menal processes (experiences, sances, assessmens,

ec.) aking place afer a phase o immediae percepion o a work o

ar. We can simply call hem aesheic responses. (Kulka, )

I is eviden ha he whole siuaion is more complicaedhanks o he ac ha crysallisaion o aesheic objec is nousually erminaed wihin aesheic percepion bu i is compleedin he aesheic response. Erns Cassirer drew atenion o he phil-osophical communiy o he ac ha comprehension o a work oar assumes a possibiliy o recurrence, repeiion o a leas basicpars o a creaive process in which i originaed. A his poin wege o anoher aesheic assumpion o aesheic percepion: dur-ing percepion o an arisic areac, a percipien has o be unedo a suiable channel hanks o which essenial condiions o de-coding o works o ar are ormed. A firs, a shor digression o

he communicaion channel. (Kulka, ) Communicaion uningis characerised by— realisaion o communicaion connecions o a siuaion (I am

looking a he picure which was pained by someone as a spe-cial ype o communicaion, means o sel–expression o anauhor)

— realisaion o syle or movemen signs, period connecions orbasic significance o a work


13/41

Key words:taste, percipient, Dionysian tendency, Appolonian tendency

In he previous chaper we ocused on aesheic percepion in gen-eral and now we are o deermine a percipien i.e. phenomenon,which is closely conneced wih i — ase and ypes of aesheicpercepion, in more deails.

. Tase

The philosopher H.G. Gadamer in his Truh and Mehod inroducesa hermeneuic analysis o he concep o ase. According o him,his concep expresses a cerain means o cogniion. (Gadamer,) He characerises “refined ase” as sensiiviy , does no rely oncerain knowledge subsaniaed in advance, and raher proceedsrom inuiive cerainy. The phenomenon o ashion is closely con-neced wih ase. “Therefore, he concep of ase means ha alsoin fashion we show moderaion and do no blindly obey varying re-

quiremens of fashion. We follow our own opinion and firmly sick

o our “syle”, i.e. we pu he requiremens of fashion ino a relaion

o a cerain whole aking ino consideraion is own ase and ac-

ceping only wha suis his whole and he way i maches i accord-

ingly.” (Gadamer, , ) Through ase we perceive eiher hingas beauiul and moreover, we have o ake ino accoun a cerainwhole ino which everyhing has o perecly fi. (Gadamer, )

miscellaneous se chains in such a way ha by simulaion o one,ohers are raised. Thus, judgemens and images, emoions and per-cep, emoions and judgemens, ec. can be inerconneced.

According o Kulka, visual percepion, as an example, is ableo arouse no only visual bu also acile, olacory, audiory andoher images which we erm syneshesias (e.g. a film sho o woodarises smell o wood in a viewer).

Percepion o an arisic objec, is decoding and subsequeninerpreaion are condiioned by percipien’ s experience andknowledge, his personaliy, overall conen o his menal lie andcogniive habis. The ac ha various experiences and aesheic

images are influenced by percipien’ s individualiy can be ermeda se o psychological processes which lead o unique inerprea-ion o a work, or by a single word appercepion.

Thanks o appercepion, every aesheic percepion has is owncolouring, is own “ase”.

When we see a wood in a picure i means somehing else or each

o us. We experience i variously, and we connec differen associa-

ions and ec. wih i. There is no percepion wihou appercepion.

Crysallisaion o an arisic objec is paricipaed by percep-ion, imaginaion, hinking and eeling. These menal uncionsare managed in order o provide a sense reflecion o a work o ar,is cogniive processing o aesheic experience, and primary, spon-aneous evaluaion o a work. All hese hen lead o decoding andfinally o inerpreaion. I ollows ha a role o knowledge, cogni-ion and experience is absoluely irreplaceable during percepion

o a work o ar or aesheic percepion.


GOMBRICH, E.: Ar and Illusion. Princeon Universiy Press, .SHUSTERMAN, R., TOMLIN, A.: Aesheic Experience.Taylor & Francis, .SOLSO, R.L.: The Abuse of Beauy: Aesheics and he Concep of Ar . Open Cour,

.

. Tase. Types of Aesheic Percepion


14/41

observan, erudiely descripive and erudiely observan. (Kul-ka, )Bullough ocused his research on aesheic evaluaion o col-

ours. He disinguishes our ypes o aesheic percepion:— Objecive ype — inellecual evaluaion is ypical o his ype, e-

eling influences an evaluaor o a lower exen han his inellec.— Inrasubjecive ype — his ype reacs o aesheic objecs

mainly emoionally. In his case, percepion is subjecive andconneced wih physiological uncions.

— Associaive ype — various associaions emerging during per-cepion are ypical o his ype o percipien.

— Characer ype — his ype perceives aesheic objecs as i heyrepresened characer eaures o his personaliy.Through sudy o purblind and blind children an American phi-

losopher Vikor Löweneld came o wo differen ypes:— Visual ype — his ype preers visual experience, builds on in-

ormaion rom he exernal, visible world.— Hapic ype — his ype o a percipien (or a creaor) relies on

his personal experience and real environmen which surroundshim. For insance, a hapic aris proceeds much more rom hisinernal world han surroundings.To pu i simply, he visual ype is anchored in exernal realiy,

while he hapic one perceives aesheic objecs hrough his ownbody and inernal world.

The mos elaboraed ypology comes rom he German ar psy-chologis o he s and s, Richard Műller–Freienels. He

arrived a five ypes o aesheic percepion applicable also o hefield o creaion:— Sensory ype — his ype concenraes especially on sense qu-

aliies o works o ar, colours, shapes and srucures are per-ceived by him very sensiively. He does no enrich hem muchwih associaions.

— Moor ype — i is a ype who reacs o aesheic objecs by mo-ion. I does no apply only o music bu o all ypes o ar. I is

Tase assesses he paricular in respec o a whole and hereoresuch evaluaion has o have a cerain “sixh sense”. As Gadamer as-sumes, i canno be proved. (Gadamer, )

. Types of Aesheic Percepion

We differ in aesheic percepion and assessmen, and ha is whainspired aesheicians, ar psychologiss and ariss o deerminevarious ypes o aesheic cogniion.

Alhough several ypologies originaed rom pleny o experi-mens, we are o inroduce a leas he mos ineresing ones. The

auhors o hese ypologies atemped o find ou individual ypi-cal prevalence o cerain menal uncions during percepion, or inhe second approach, hey ried o creae a ypology o percepionbased on exernal, subjec aspecs o aesheic areacs. A paricu-lar ype o he given ypologies deermines a process or a uncionbeing presen in he oreground during aesheic percepion oa paricular individual.

A he beginning o he cenury, he French psychologisAlred Bine and his Briish counerpar Edward Bullough inro-duced a well–known ypology o aesheic percepion.

Bine proceeded rom he aesheic objec. He disinguishesour ypes o aesheic percepion:— Descripive ype — his ype ocuses on descripion o deails,

does no ry o define heir sense and relaions.— Observaion ype — his ype o percipien caches only signifi-

can eaures o an aesheic objec and evaluaes hem.— Erudie ype — a percipien o his ype does no ry o describe

or analyse an objec, bu raher inroduces everyhing wha heknows abou i.

— Emoional (imaginaive) ype — his ype atemps o capureemoional meaning o an aesheic objec. Bine’ s ypology waslaer elaboraed — or insance F. Műller presened six ypes:descripive, observan, emoionally descripive, emoionally


15/41

a work o an aris. Basically, here are wo conradicory opinionsregarding percepion o ar. According o one o hem, a percipienshould be in an idenical mood wih an aris — only hen we com-prehend his message also wihou preparaion and various com-mens. Supporers o he oher atiude asser ha a work o arhas o undergo analyses based on knowledge o paricular arisicaesheics.

Wha is problemaised here is virually an issue o sponaneiyo percepion o a work o ar. The firs opinion believes in spona-neiy, whereby ar is predominanly a mater o eeling, while heoher atiude assumes cerain aesheic disance and raionaliy.

In Kulka’ s view, also a hird opinion is accepable, i.e. he so–calledprepared sponaneiy. When perceiving a work, cerain knowl-edge is necessary and does no inerrup sponaneiy o a courseo communicaion. (Kulka, ) When knowledge is sufficienlyauomaed, i can work a he background, in a basis o sponane-ous percepional ac. Wha aesheic — psychological principles opreparaion or percepion o a work o ar and subsequen arisicexperience could we render? The so–called permanen disposiionso arisic experience include knowledge (e.g. hisorical knowledgeo modificaions o individual ypes o ar), opinions on ar, a posi-ion o ar in an individual’ s value hierarchy, aesheic experience,his lie and culural syle, ec. I one considers ar o be somehingpoinless, seldom can i arouse inensive experience in him; i hesees ar only as a source o un, i negaively influences his choiceo arisic producion (and subsequen percepion and inerprea-

ion o a work o ar).Excep or he permanen disposiions i is necessary o orm

also he so–called curren disposiions direcly conneced wihlisening o music, visi o exhibiion, cinema, ec. I includes lispreparaion o recepion environmen, social amosphere, esab-lishmen o rus in an aris, uning o a suiable communicaionchannel, ec. Upgrade of aesheic orienaion wihin which releaseo pracical correcions o everyday experience and subsequenly

no always real moion; requenly only images o moion arepresen.

— Imaginaive ype — or his ype o percipien or creaor an ar-isic objec represens an oucome o rich anasy aciviies.

— Inellecual ype — his ype o percipien or creaor pus inel-lecual processing o experience in he oreground.

— Emoional ype — i is a ype who les himsel be enchaned byhis emoional experiences.Műller–Freienels inroduced also wo ypes o percipiens aris-

ing rom he opposie o empahy (die Einűhlung) and conempla-

ion (die Konemplaion). He applied Niezsche’ s erms “Dionysian”

and “Appolonian” approach o wo differen ypological endencies:

Dionysian endency preers emoional relaxedness, sponaneiy or

even ecsaicness, while Appolonian endency is moderae, conem-

plaive, almos asceic. (Műller– Freienels, ) Moreover, in he

sysem ypology, we disinguish beween acive and passive percipi-

ens, i.e. beween “eam maes” and “viewers”. An acive eam mae

no only ully experiences aesheic objec bu also empahises wih

i, while a passive viewer le himsel be carried away only by ree as-

sociaions which an objec arouses in him. According o Kulka, hese

wo endencies can be even combined and hus we can also speak

abou a passive eam mae and an acive viewer. (Kulka, ).

. Sponaneiy of Percepion of a Work of Ar

The ypologies o aesheic percepion and creaion represen an

excellen ool when caegorising a wide specrum o percipiensand creaors. A he same ime, hey help wih more proound com-prehension o “consumpion” o aesheic objecs and ar. Ye, hequesion is, how much effor a consumer have o make in order ocomprehend a work o ar. Pleny o consumers believe ha heyshould comprehend a work immediaely, wihou any effor. Ac-cording o majoriy o ar heoreicians and aesheicians, his accan be considered a serious maniesaion o disrespec owards


16/41

Key words: arisic creaion, arisic apiude, preparaion, incubaion, inspiraion, verificaion

Arisic creaion represens a cerain ype o creaiviy. Accordingo Blažeková’ s ypology, we can disinguish exisenial and insru- menal creaiviy. (B. Blažek, J. Olmrová, ) Exisenial creaiv-iy has he ollowing characerisics: i inereres ino all spheres ohuman exisence, canno be augh, remains non–proessional inis expression and ocuses on a sense o lie. On he oher hand, in-srumenal creaiviy concerns raher specific eaures o a humanbeing, can be augh and leads o proessionalizaion and improve-men o perormance. Some philosophers pu creaiviy ino a cen-re o world affairs (or example: Bergson, Whiehead and ohers).From own experience and sel–observaion an aris knows ha hecan provide only incomplee inormaion abou a creaive process.Even objecive observaion does no bring much inormaion as, orinsance, depiced in a documenary Le Mysére Picasso o , in

which a viewer can see a birh o a creaive inenion and a processo work o a painer. A camera shoos all Picasso’ s moions in de-ails which are rom ime o ime accompanied by direcor’ s ques-ions and Picasso’ s replies. However, we observe only a way howhe aris skeches paricular composiions, hrows away skeches,draws new ones and permanenly redraws somehing and so on.The documenary shows improvisaory sponaneiy and Picasso’s viruosiy, ye neiher he working auhor himsel, nor a viewer

o anasy ake place can be considered he mos imporan par opreparaion o arisic experience. Furher, individual’ s ocus oninernal experience o himsel ges accenuaed. (Kulka, )

I aesheic experience should be complee, we canno be pas-sively carried away by a work o ar. Experience should be a resulo concenraion, inellec and anasy. As Kulka saes, aesheicexperience originaes only hanks o acive conribuion o a per-cipien. (Kulka, )


Műller– Freienels, R.: Psychologie der Kuns I– III , Berlin, , .Műller– Freienels, R.: Psychologie der Musik. Berlin, .

. Creaion of a Work of Ar


17/41

This classificaion is no axiological — (primary does no meanbeter) only expresses a way o paricipaion o a creaor on crea-ion o an areac. The classificaion is significan when clariy-ing psychology o creaion, because i makes a difference, i a crea-or creaes independenly o he beginning or i he proceeds roma projec. Creaion o a work o ar can be comprehended as a so-luion o a specific problem. A problemaic siuaion is generallysolved, i we find a soluion, i.e. a means how o change A sae o Bsae, provided he A sae represens an iniial siuaion o aris-ic creaion during which an aris acquires his creaive inenion.Subsequenly, he ulfils his inenion hrough a whole array o ar-

isic experience and skills. I we borrow a erminology rom evo-luionariss, we can say ha creaion o an arisic areac akesplace on he basis o— Random Selecions (a creaor generaes various ideas and ries

possibiliies) and— Selecive Reenion o hose variaions which develop creaor’ s

inenion.Thus, an aris plays wih his ideas. His work is insincive in

many aspecs. He requenly does no know wha he is doing andeven he someimes does no know wha his picure means. Picassodescribed his creaive aciviy as a game and he would probablyproes agains he ac ha he is solving a problem. From a cogni-ive perspecive, i is a creaive soluion o a problem hrough a cre-aor’ s variaion and subsequen choice o he mos suiable one.

. Sages of Arisic Creaion

A he end o he s he American psychologis G. Wallas inro-duced he ollowing sages o arisic creaion:

Preparaion (educaion), incubaion (mauring) illuminaion(a soluion procedure) and verificaion (check). As Kulka assers,sages o creaion which are divided a bi more minuely are ac-ceped oday:

knows wha will arise rom he creaive aciviy. Picasso himselcommened on his issue: “when one is working, he does no knowwha will be he resul. I is no indecisiveness. A change akesplace no sooner han during work”.

A subsance o arisic creaion remains veiled in mysery alsodue o he ac ha pleny o is momens are irraional, inui-ive and random. As several ariss (Kafa, Kundera, Wagner, Eco,Goehe and ohers) assume, a coincidence cooperaes wih a crea-or only i he is prepared. Arisic depicion o he world passeshrough several sages which we could express as a preex — hefirs arisic impressions and images presen in aris’ s mind, anarchiex — represens more specific noes, dras, skeches, ec,a prooex — dras, models, score, a ex — is a final arrangemeno arisic signs, a meaex — ollows aer publicaion o a ex— reviews, criiques or own commens, reflecions and so on.

. Types of Aesheic Creaion

The Russian aesheician J. G. Gurenko classified arisic creaionino ypes. A degree o compleion o an areac and exen oindependence o aris’ s creaive aciviy represened he crieria.Gurenko disinguishes compleely independen creaion, relaivelyindependen creaion and compleely dependen creaion whichhe does no considers o be arisic.

According o Gurenko’ s division, Kulka inroduced a more de-ailed caegorisaion:

Ala — creaion (primary ype, o independen creaion) — pain-

ing, sculpuring

Bea — creaion (primary ype, o relaively independen crea-ion) — music composing, belles–letres wriing

Gama — creaion (secondary ype, o relaively independencreaion) — dramaurgy, direcing, conducing, choreography

Dela — creaion (secondary ype, o relaively dependen crea-ion) — ar o acing, dancing and film shooing.


18/41

and incubaion is significance is paramoun. In his phase, hemos original ideas originae. P. Valéry aply said ha he firs verseis given o an auhor, while ohers have o be writen by him. A wayrom inspiraion o he ollowing sage — illuminaion is usuallyshor, hereore, i is excepionally vial or aris o capure i.

. Illuminaion (enlighenmen) — Inspiraion provides newideas and images o an aris, alhough no all o hem are suia-ble and applicable. When selecing hose suiable ones, arisic in-uiion helps. Alhough his ype o inuiive insigh is requenlycomprehended as almos mysical, menal regulaion o inuiiveprocesses is equally realisically condiioned as any oher aciviy.

Individual menal acs can be ormed or insance in a way ena-bling applicaion o all o hem a once insead o according o heirorder. Or oher processes ake places subconsciously. An inuiiveview hen looks like a sudden idea which emerged unexpecedly. Nomater how mysical he idea migh appear, i has o be prepared.

. Elaboraion (implemenaion) — his sage is disproporion-ally longer han he inspiraion and illuminaion ones. I mighconcern pars o a work or is whole — in every ollowing idea ar-is’ s simulus o work is hidden.

. Evaluaion (assessmen) — direcly ollows each processingo simuli. An auhor basically consanly checks wheher expres-sion o his work ulfils he original communicaion inenion. Ahe same ime, resricion o reedom o creaor’ s decision makingoccurs since possibiliies o choice o suiable alernaives are morelimied and someimes a work sars o dicae is uure develop-

men o is own auhor. From ime o ime, he evaluaion sageleads o inervenions ino already finished work o ar.

. Correcion (revision) — his sage includes final modificaionso an areac, addiional changes, and addiions, ec. (Kulka, )

. Preparaion (educaion) — his sage is no necessary, al-hough i is an excepionally requen phase o implemenaion oa work o ar. However, preparaion can be also omited (in a cer-ain sense, auhor’ s earlier lie and arisic experience always rep-resen preparaion).

Noneheless, in creaion he preparaion phase is presen more

ofen han no– ollows a birh o arisic inenion, modifies and

concreises i gradually, more and more . The ariss who shared

descripion o heir preparaion aciviies are, or insance, Picasso

wih his Guernica, T. Mann wih his he ex The Genesis o Docor

Fausus or F. Lisz who said: My spiri and my fingers are working

like he damned; Homer, he Bible, Plao, Locke, Byron, Hugo, Lamar-

ine, Beehoven, Bach, Hummel, Mozar, Weber and he ohers are all

around me all he ime. I sudy hem, mediae hem, devour hem

uriously, besides his I pracise our o five hours a day (heories,

sixhs, ocaves, remolos, cadences, and so on). (Kulka, )

. Incubaion (mauring) — creaor’ s inenion is a subjec ohis permanen imaginaive aciviy, i akes place during sleepingand being awake and is processed knowingly and unknowingly. Ar-isic draing during which selecion o inormaion required orcreaion o a work occurs is iniiaed by he incubaion sage. Theground or he ollowing sage o illuminaion is being prepared inhis phase and since creaion is a problem which an aris needs osolve creaively, a birh o areac is also accompanied by cerainension, doubs, someimes even anxiey. These eelings evoke newimages in creaor’ s mind and someimes increasing ension leads

o a sae o everish creaion and sel–orgeting.. Inspiraion (simulus) — i is a special case o ocus includ-

ing uncioning o various creaor’ s appercepions such as, or in-sance, proposiion o new ideas, sensiive percepion o problems,creaive combinaorics and variaions o individual images. In hisphase, new ideas are discovered mos easily alhough i represensan excepionally ragile sage. Inspiraion is no he only condiiono arisic creaion. In spie o he ac ha i ollows preparaion


19/41

answers is indeed more imporan han heir discovery. Children

who represened he subjec o Dočkal’ s research showed above–

average perormance also in classical inelligen ess, while adul

ariss ofen achieved only average in hem, heir abiliies have spe-

cialised in spheres which are no recorded by he ess. A significan

sign o arisic apiude are broad–specrum arisic ineress. A gif-

ed man does no ocus only on his ype o ar (Rabíndranáh Thákur

— a Nobel Prize winner in lieraure was also an excellen musician,

M. Dierich was an ousanding violinis in her childhood, L. Ull-

mann engaged in heare direcing and drawing, ec.). (Dočkal, )

Musical apiude — he American psychologis C. E. Seashore

defined a musical alen as a se o specific musical abiliies: melod-ic and harmonic hearing, a sense o rhyhm and musical memory.An ineres in musical sounds occurs in a developmen o a childalready during he firs or second year o lie, musical abiliies inpre–school age.

Fine ar apiude — children wih a fine ar alen have an ex-cepional visual memory, are able o draw recognisable shapes oneyear ahead o children o heir age (approximaely aer reach-ing he age o ). Inelligence o children wih fine ar apiude isabove–average, hey perorm bes in ess and examinaions ononverbal creaive abiliies.

Lierary and dramaic apiude — above–average inelligencein he field o verbal creaiviy is ypical o his ype o apiude.Owing o he ac ha i is an inerpreaional alen, excep orverbal abiliies i also requires empahy, urher, movemen mem-

ory, movemen creaiviy, coordinaion o a moor aciviy, verbalmemory, phoneic abiliies and verbal creaiviy.


BERGSON, H.: Creaive Evoluion. Dover Publicaions, .RUNCO, M.A.: Creaiviy. Theories and Themes: Research, Developmen, and Prac-

ice, Academic Press, .

. Creaor’ s Personaliy

Arisic creaiviy is a mater o a whole personaliy. I is no shapedonly by a ew excepional abiliies. I he aris’ s personaliyshould bring new aesheic values, i has o be maniold, sensiiveand original. The mos requenly menioned properies connecedwih arisic creaiviy are as ollows: sensiiviy (percepiveness,problem sensiiviy), fluency (abiliy o quick and heerogeneousproducion, finding o various alernaives o a soluion), flexibiliy(elasiciy o hinking), originaliy (abiliy o produce new ideas),redefiniion (abiliy o repeaedly deermine and remake), elabora-

ion (abiliy o develop houghs), analyical characer (abiliy obeing good a analysing and using exising experience, dividinga whole ino pars), synheic characer (abiliy o apply old ele-mens and experience in new means o creaion) and improvisa-ion (abiliy o produce wihou preparaion, according o a currenmood). The inroduced creaive abiliies are quie complex. Excepor he above, also he ollowing creaor’ s characerisics showed inresearches as decisive: sel–madness and sel–reliance, independ-ence, sel–conrol, sel–developmen, asseriveness, conemplaive-ness, variabiliy, immediacy, sponaneiy, creaiviy, dreaminess,anasy, openness, and menal wealh (i.e. rich inner lie, processedpainul experience, ec.).

We can see ha an arisically creaive individual lives rich in-ner lie, works on himsel, is open o world and change, while a hesame ime remains himsel, suffers rom uncerainy, ear and pain.

(Kulka, )

. Arisic Apiude

Wha represens a subsance o arisic apiude? On a basis o his

researches, V. Dočkal assers ha dominaion o a creaive par o

inellec over reproducion one (so–called divergen ype o inel-

ligence) is ypical o arisic alens. For ar a search or various


20/41

A male nose prorudes a litle bi more and is shape ranges roma sraigh o convex profile. Women have eiher a sraigh or con-cave nose profile. Men have generally raher a sraigh (so–calledRoman) nose conrarily o women who mosly have a small nosewih a ip urned upward.

Inersexual differences o a ace shape are also visible whenexamining a orehead. A male orehead usually prorudes orwardespecially in an area jus above he nose and eyes represeninga more dominan supraorbial ridge and moves obliquely backwardunlike a emale orehead which is more perpendicular or rounded.Ineresing differences can be ound also in he eye area. Male eyes

seems o be se deeper, more sunken, while emale ones are no sohollow or se deep and hereore hey are more conspicuous.

Inersexual differences in he mouh area reside in oal size

o lips. Women have bigger and more proruding lips han men.

(Pivoňková, ) A sex can be deermined wih high probabiliy al-

ready rom a ace o a new–born child — male newborns have wider

head and generally wider ace, smaller eyes and lower se eyebrows.

In order o increase heir atraciveness and womanliness,women accenuae all menioned eminine characerisics usingdecoraive cosmeics (eye shadows, cheek make–up, a lipsick ...).Inensiying o a red lip colour gives rise o an idea o emoionalsaes conneced wih exciemen wha increases woman’ s appealin no small measure.

. Briefly on Specific Brain Funcions During Face Percepion

“The ace specificiy hypohesis” is discussed in connecion wihcogniive processes o ace percepion. This hypohesis is relaedo exisence o a neural nework beween he emporal and occipi-al lobe — in gyrus fusiformis — “fusiform face area” — FFA. (Kan-wisher — Yovel, )

Exisence o his area is proven mainly by he ac ha we per-

ceive aces as a specific caegory o observed objecs. As soon as we

Key words: face, direcional asymmery, flucuaing asymmery,face averaging

Percepion o a human ace represens a crucial aspec or oriena-ion in a sociey and esimaion o properies o unknown persons.Can we imagine how hard i would be o communicae wih a manwho los mos o his ace? In he counries o he Far Eas, a losso ace (meaning losing o digniy) is viewed as he greaes harmworse han deah. For insance in ancien period, an expression ora heare mask has become a erm or a person — prosopon (La.persona), while Russian uses a erm lico in order o denoe a person.Also a Romany expression gádžo which can be ranslaed as “wih-ou a ace” is remarkable. (Komárek, )

. Male and Female Characerisics

Male and emale aces differ in heir shapes. Shape differences

begin o deepen during he period o pubery. They are causedmainly by he influence o sex hormones — esoserone in menand oesrogen in women. A male ace differs rom he emale onemainly in greaer developmen o a lower jaw, bigger prorudingcheekbones and a deeper–se ace. (Enlow — Hans, ) A emaleace reminds o a ace o a child by is srucure. A male body is onaverage bigger, hereore men have also bigger lungs and a respira-ory rac, i ollows ha hey also have a bigger nose han women.

. Percepion of Beauy of a Human Face


21/41

. Averageness

Cerain ype o averageness (we do no use a erm mediocriy sincewe do no discuss he mos common ace eaures) has shown obe one o he aspecs o atracive aces. By averageness we wano denoe a ac ha a ace as a whole approaches o hypohei-cal average o populaion. Sir Francis Galon was among he firsscieniss who noiced his phenomenon in he mid– cenury.He was aking composie phoographs o criminals in order o finda ypical appearance o a criminal. He ook phoographs via repea-ed exposures o negaives o individual aces one over he oher

and ound ou ha a final ace is much more atracive han aceso individual criminals rom which i was creaed. Laer in he cenury his phenomenon reappeared in researches. Evoluionaryoriened psychologiss (Fink, B., Voak, I.) assume ha atracive-ness o average aces is a consequence o sabilising selecion andpoins ou o higher exen o heerozygousness o an individual.(Fink — Penon — Voak, )

. Symmery

The second very imporan characerisic o acial atracivenessis symmery. A human body is bilaerally symmerical and hus wecan disinguish beween direcional and flucuaing ace asymme-ry. (Havlíček, Rubešová, )

Direcional asymmery represens sysemaic differences be-

ween righ and le side caused by aciviy o a paricular individ-ual; unlike flucuaing asymmery which resuls rom random dis-similariies exising beween boh sides which probably originaedas a consequence o imperec gene expression during onogeneicdevelopmen or by effec o pahogens or combinaion o boh as-pecs. Researches show ha he lower flucuaion asymmery ishe more atracive a ace becomes in evaluaion. Even he evalu-aion o monozygoic wins showed ha he more symmerical

ideniy an objec as a ace, cerebral corex areas specifically ocused

on a ace analysis ge simulaed. (Gauier — Behrmann, )

An ineresing hing is ha his acion akes place also duringpercepion o an exraordinary simulus siuaion — or insance,when a ace is urned by °. During idenificaion o an inverse-ly urned ace a ime delay occurs (ms) wha is inerpreed asa wo–sage ace recogniion. When a ace is assessed as atracive,he medial orbioronal corex ges simulaed. Facial atracive-ness increases aciviy o he corex. I is remarkable ha his ac-iviy and atraciveness o a given ace increase a he same imewhen one is smiling. (Blažek, )

Evaluaion wheher we like, repulse, ound somehing ineres-ing or no represens one o iniial aspecs when perceiving a ace.

In he ollowing lines we are o deal wih knowledge on charac-erisics o atracive aces rom a perspecive o curren cogniivepsychology and ehology. Especially evoluionary oriened con-ceps are o be discussed.

Percepion o atraciveness usually modifies on a basis oconex o meeing wih a given ace. Wheher we realize i orno, appeal significanly influences pleny o our social deci-sions and aciviies — reamen o offspring, choice o a par-ner, lawsuis, choice o employees, and so on. Individuals whogave he impression o being atracive are usually consideredo be more desirable parners, have more sexual parners andbegin earlier wih heir sexual lie. (Rhodes– Simmons, )As we have already menioned, he ace is no he only par o a hu-

man body which influences our percepion o individuals as atrac-ive or unatracive — we evaluae heigh, size o breass as wellas wais o hip raio or wais o shoulder raio on men. These oh-er characerisics represen a subjec o chaper . Unil recenlya communiy o psychologiss, aesheicians, ariss and anhro-pologiss believed ha atraciveness o ace depends on ase andhus ha percepion o beauy differs depending on culural andsocial aspecs o sociey. (Havlíček — Rubešová, )


22/41

characerisic affecing he appeal o a human being is hair. Theamoun o ime and resources we dedicae o hair care could be oneo he indicaors o significance o hair. (Havlíček, Rubešová, )

Face expressiviy represens also imporan crierion o is a-raciveness. For insance, as Mason, Takow and Macrae ound ou,people looking owards us are perceived o be more atracive. Indi-viduals wih dilaed pupils are equally perceived o be more atrac-ive, which is requenly used in markeing. Individuals promo-ing producs on billboards have digially dilaed pupils. (Havlíček,Rubešová) Also smile has excepionally posiive influence on a-raciveness. A sudy o Jones e al. has shown ha direcly seen

smiling aces were perceived o be more atracive, while aces wiha neural expression were considered more appealing rom a sideview.

. Atraciveness During he Mensrual Cycle

Majoriy o sudies agreed on he ac ha emale acial atrac-iveness changes during he cycle. Men and likewise women de-ermined phoographs o women aken in he ollicular phase asmore atracive. Sudies also confirmed a posiive relaion amongatraciveness, emininiy and levels o oesrogen in women whodid no wear make–up. However, he sudies did no unequivocallyshow which ace characerisics ge modified during he period. Imigh be a change o inensiy o red lip colour in connecion wihincrease o a basal emperaure during ovulaion, modificaion o

colour and qualiy o skin, dilaaion o pupils and so on. Le usconinue in discussing o an excepionally ineresing phenom-enon — he emale mensrual cycle or anoher while.

Several sudies implemened during las decades imply haduring he cycle also modificaion o atraciveness preerencesakes place. During periods preceding and ollowing ovulaion in-creased preerence o masculine eaures was discovered. Simmonsand Roney’ s experimen measuring levels o esoserone presen

one is considered o be he more atracive. An ineresing hing isha exen o symmery is no saic — i modifies, or insance, inconnecion wih he mensrual cycle. During he ovulaion periodemale aces (bu or insance also breass) are more symmerical.(Scut — Manning, , –) Modificaions o male sym-mery in connecion wih a level o cerain hormones have beendiscovered, as well.

How should we explain a endency o consider symmericalaces o be more atracive? There are a leas wo heories. Ac-cording o he firs one, i is a secondary produc o uncioningo our visual sysem which processes symmerical objecs more

easily han asymmerical ones. This would mean a general preer-ence o symmerical shapes. However, his hypohesis can be easilyconradiced by he ac ha we process aces in specific pars obrain (as we have menion above). The second heory comes againrom evoluionary psychologiss — a endency o preer symmeri-cal aces represens adapaion or selecion o a geneic qualiyparner. Low exen o flucuaing ace asymmery means ceraindevelopmenal sabiliy hough. Exen o symmery reflecs qual-iy o gene expression during developmen o organism and also isabiliy o cope wih pahogens, oxic subsances and oher environ-menal dangers.

. Oher Aspecs of Facial Atraciveness

Excep or ace eaures acial atraciveness is influenced also,

or insance, by skin hrough which we can deermine he age oan individual, sae o healh or sex, as well. As we ge older ourskin acquires wrinkles, is less sreched and covered wih morepigmened lesions. Skin reflecs pleny o healh problems — acne,eczemas, skin inecions, jaundice, ec. These aspecs influence as-sessmen o acial atraciveness o a large exen. For insance,Fink and Thornhill’ s researches showed ha homogeneiy o e-male skin exure correlaes wih acial atraciveness. Anoher


23/41

heads in a nose of cosmeic procedures, slimming and plasic sur-

geries. They are willing o sarve, hus no wonder ha a number

of anorexias and bulimias has increased markedly. Riuals serving

he beauy myh replace also religious riuals because if a woman

wans o ea correcly, do exercise correcly, run, use he righ cos-

meics and clohes, she canno save oo much ime for somehing

else and if she finds i, she is ired, exhaused and emoionally over-

loaded.” (Wol, )


Langois, J.H., Roggman, L.A.: Atracive Faces are only Average. Psychological Sci-ence, : — . .

in men showed ha women wih a high level o esadiol, i.e. hosewho are in he period beore and aer ovulaion incline o aceso men wih high levels o esoserone. These resuls are mosrequenly inerpreed as adapaion o preerence o individualswih properies implying srong geneic makeup.

Owing o ancien Plaonic idenificaion o beauy and goodwe usually assign more posiive properies o more atracive peo-ple. So, in a cerain sense, more appealing people were born undera lucky sar. They suffer less rom loneliness, social anxiey andembarrassmens in public. We like helping hem and esablishingrelaions wih hem, even i showed ha i is more difficul o lie

o a more atracive individual han o less appealing one. The acha atracive individuals are preerred as sexual parners hasbeen already menioned or several imes. Moreover, beauiul peo-ple have more posiive sel–image as o heir abiliies and menalhealh. Atraciveness is pu ino a relaion wih inelligence — a-racive individuals are perceived as more inelligen (ye, sudiesdiverge in his). I is highly probable ha beauiul aces atrac us jus due o all hese posiive characerisics which we connec wihhem.

“A profiable business has developed from he cul of beauy,

whole branches of indusry and services live on i, however, wha

is worse, i has become a ool for manipulaion of woman hrough

assessmen and classificaion. Beauy myh lies o all ha here is

somehing like he ideal of beauy and herefore i is necessary ha

women atemped o achieve i and men adore i.” (Wol, ) Nao-

mi Wol in her besseller The Beauy Myh assers ha also youhis a par o he curren “beauy myh”: “I is eviden, how pleny ofemployers follow his sandard. Some of hem wan o employ only

young women, ohers have requiremens conneced wih visage

and behaviour. Generally, i represens a srain affecing woman’

s behaviour because an atack via he beauy norm forces her o

“work on herself”. This erm already sounds even posiively because

he beauy myh includes also healh. Women hemselves pu heir


24/41

and Srahman, () poined ou in heir sudies o significanceo male heigh when evaluaing atraciveness. When a baskeballplayer Magic Johnson announced ha he had had housands lov-ers he unequivocally uncovered emale preerences or parnerswho have ahleic qualiies. Physical properies — build and powerindicae imporan inormaion which women apply when choos-ing a parner. (Buss, ) I seems ha significance o physicalproperies can be ound hroughou he whole animal kingdom.For insance, during couring o species o a gladiaor reefrog (Hyla rosenbergi), a emale rogs inenionally ram o a siting malerog which hey have chosen. They hi i srongly and i i alls ou

o a nes, a emale rog sars o look somewhere else. Majoriy oemale rogs copulaes wih hose male rogs which can wihsandheir atack, since ramming helps hem o evaluae success rae oproecion o is offspring. (Buss, )

Similarly, physical proecion which men can offer o womenrepresens one o he advanages also or women. So, man’ s heigh,power and finess are signs a woman preers. Tall men (i.e. abovecm) are considered more atracive, heir all figure brings ad-vanages a work where hey usually ge a higher posiions, heymee wih he opposie sex more oen and are assessed as moredesired parners. Pawlowski, Dunbar, Lipowicz and ohers oundou ha men who have children are aller han hose who do nohave hem (hey included also educaion, age and place o resi-dence as variables). Sudies dealing wih adverisemens showedha % o women which menioned heigh in an adverisemen

require man who is a leas cm all. Adverisemens placedby aller man received more replies han hose placed by shorerones. Evaluaion o male heigh shows as crucial also in a polii-cal sphere. D. Buss assers ha only ew American presidens wereshorer han cm. In , G. Bush riumphed in a TV debae bysanding very close o his shorer opponen M. Dukakis.

I is imporan o keep in mind ha according o researchespreerence o all, physically fi men is no culurally resriced.

Key words: body atraciveness, wais–o–hip raio

Significance o atraciveness or inerpersonal conacs has al-ready shown in he previous chaper (persons wih atraciveshapes are assessed less sricly, hey can find parners more easily,a whole array o posiive properies is assigned o hem, ec.). Howis body atraciveness perceived? Evidenly, i will no be prema-ure o predic ha physical atraciveness represens a similarlyimporan acor as a beauiul ace when assessing ohers, esab-lishing o conacs and searching and keeping o a parner. Whaare mechanisms o percepion and evaluaion o physical atrac-iveness? Sexual dimorphism plays a subsanial role when evalu-aing body atraciveness as well as acial appeal. A firs we are oocus on eaures women find atracive.

. Wha do Women Like?

Mousache and body shape are he mos disincive sexual charac-erisics o a human being. According o pleny o Barber’ s sudies,women view men wih mousache as more atracive (women as-sign a lo o posiive properies o hem), or hem hey look older,more masculine, braver, more maure and more reliable. (Barber,) Furher, according o researches, women preer propor-ionally developed chess o exremely muscular figures. (Barber,) Barber (), Schumacher, () Jackson, () Shepherd

. Percepion of Beauy of a Body


25/41

Our oreahers had wo signals a heir disposal which showedwoman’ s youh — physical appearance (ull lips, so skin, cleareyes, brigh hair and muscle onus) and behavioural maniesaions(youhul moion, vial mimics and vivaciy). We have menionedalready in he previous chaper ha unhealhy skin shows as un-atracive. Cleanliness and healh can be considered as universallyatracive, noneheless sandards o physical atraciveness variesculurally. A lady wih a slim figure is somewhere viewed as ap-pealing and somewhere else he plumper one is more atracive.Culures differ in evaluaion o paleness or swarhyness o a skin,genials, breas and so on. As Buss (, ) claims, in many cul-

ures men preer big breass, ye he Azande in Sudan or Gandamen in Uganda incline raher o long, sagging breass. Preerenceo slim or plumper figures differs culurally, as well. These preer-ences are conneced especially wih a social posiion abou whicha body srucure atess, hus in culures where ood is precious(Ausralian Bushmen) a corpulen figure is considered appealing(means wealh, healh); conrarily, in culures wih enough oodhe relaion beween corpulenness and a social posiion is seenvice–versa. Men’ s individual preerence o a cerain volume o aon a emale body probably did no develop. (Buss, )

A sudy o Paul Rozin e al. researching emale and male viewo various ypes o figures showed ineresing oucomes. In an ex-perimen men and women observed figures ranging rom veryskinny o obese one. Subsequenly, women and men chose he onewho corresponded o heir ideal. Moreover, women should have de-

ermined also a figure who hey believed corresponded o a maleideal. In boh cases, women seleced a figure slimmer han averagewhile men chose appropriae proporions. Thus, women moslymisakenly believe ha men long or very slim women. (Buss, )

Alhough male preerences o emale physical proporionsvary, he psychologis Devendra Singh discovered cerain consanphysical preerence. I is a preerence o a wais–o–hip raio. Dur-ing pubery, boys lose a in he area o highs while during pubery

For insance, he anhropologis Thomas Gregor who perormeda research o Mehinaku ribe in Brazilian oress claimed ha mus-cular men wih a all figure easily esablish conacs wih plenyo parners. They are “handsome” (awisiri) or women, commandrespec, riumph in poliics and sexual lie — embody all masculinequaliies. On he oher hand, shor men are scornully called peri-su and seen as wimps and down–and–ous. (Gregor, )

Despie he ac ha assigning o atraciveness o aller men has

been proved, here is sill a quesion wheher male physical charac-

erisics are seleced because hey are signs o good genes. For in-

sance, in Barber’ s view, a male figure undergoes sexual selecion ow-

ing o emale preerence o all, muscular men who are able o scare

enemies. Ye, exremely all and muscular men are no atracive o

women wha implies ha male physical characerisics did no have

o necessarily origin hrough sexual selecion on he basis o good

genes. (Barber, ) However, i seems, according o pleny o sud-

ies, ha physical atraciveness o man is much less imporan o

women han, or insance, social posiion, economic background, reli-

abiliy and inelligence. (Buss, ) Conrarily, men see physical ap-

pearance o woman as excepionally imporan since i bears much

inormaion abou reproducion value o a chosen objec.

. Wha do Men Like?

For a man he primary crierion when evaluaing physical beauyo a woman is her youh, since a emale reproducion value con-

sanly decreases aer reaching o he age o . I is low in heage o and in he age o is geting closer o zero. Preerenceo youh is no resriced only o wesern culures. For insance,he anhropologis Napoleon Chagnon assers ha or men romAmazonian Indian ribe Yanomanö women who are “moko dude“— i.e. represen a ripe rui: are erile, and are he mos atracive.(Chagnon: Yanomanö, ) Men preerred younger parners hanhey are hemselves in researched culures. (Buss, )


26/41

he wais–o–hip raio and BMI o sandard women highly corre-

lae. (Toyvée, ) Démuh saes ha according o evoluionary

oriened episemologiss, here a priori are srucures in our mind

acquired empirically, hrough experience o species causing ha we

can perceive beauy or atraciveness. (Démuh, )

Researches unequivocally confirm ha owing o various signalsphysical appearance o woman ransmis woman’ s physical beauyis he mos significan male preerence when selecing a parner.Buss presens an American sudy covering all generaions duringa fiy–year period rom o . The sudy measured a valuemen and women assign o various properies o seleced objecs. In

all cases, men conrarily o women assessed physical appearance obe more imporan. (Buss, )

Media images which consanly bombard us enormously affecour assessmen o beauy.

Kenrick e al. perormed a research based on showing o pho-ographs o very appealing women or women o average appear-ance o a group o men; subsequenly, men were asked o evaluaeheir commimen o heir exising parners. Men who saw pho-ographs o very atracive women disurbingly evaluaed heirown parners as less appealing han men who saw phoographs ohe women o average appearance. In spie o he ac ha we areendowed wih idenical evaluaive mechanisms which developedin people during prehisoric imes, oday, hese mechanisms arearificially simulaed by visually saed culure in magazines, onelevision, billboards, ec. As a consequence o waching such im-

ages o “perecion”, men have been becoming less saisfied and lesscommited o heir parners. O course, women do no all behindand do no sand idly by — cosmeic surgery experiences boom andhuge profis, menal anorexia is very requen phenomenon andwomen choose more sophisicaed, expensive, noneheless oensel–desrucive means o beauiy hemselves.

I unequivocally shows ha physical atraciveness has irre-placeable advanages — appealing people are more popular — we

o girls a accumulaes in heir bodies. Aer pubery, a emale ra-io o hipline o waisline is markedly lower han he male one. Re-producively healhy women have a raio ranging rom . o ..Several argumens prove ha his raio represens an indicaor oemale abiliy o reproduce. A lower raion poins ou o previouspuberal endocrinal aciviy, on he oher hand, a higher one meansa pregnancy problem. As Démuhová claims (Démuhová, ), iis vial or a woman as a poenial moher o secure enough en-ergy o her child and possibiliy o gain i rom poenial suppliesincreases her success. From his perspecive, very hin emale fig-ures are less atracive o men han hose which have a supplies.

Singh perormed sudies in which men assessed atracivenesso emale figures differing in he wais–o–hip raio and overall vol-ume o a. An average figure was assessed by men as more atrac-ive han oo slim or obese ones. Female figures wih a raio o .were considered he mos appealing. Singh analyzed also Playboymagazine models and winners o beauy coness in he USA orhe las years and poined ou o he ac ha preerence o hewais–o–hip raio does no change alhough models go slimmerduring decades, heir wais–o–hip raio remained idenical — ..Explanaion o preerence o his raio could be also he ac hapregnancy significanly changes his sae. A higher raio “copies”pregnancy and ha makes women look less atracive. On he oh-er hand, a lower raio signalises healh, reproducion finess andabsence o ongoing pregnancy. (Buss, )

Anoher acor influencing male assessmen o emale figure

atraciveness is symmery. As Démuhová assers (Démuhová,

), rom biological perspecive a symmerical body represens

an indicaor o is phenoypic and geneic qualiy. Researches con-

firming significance o his indicaor were perormed on various age

groups ( — years), occupaions (worker — physician) and eh-

nic groups (Euro — Aro — Americans). Assessmen was perormed

via Body Mass Index (BMI) — a weigh–o–heigh raio. I BMI value

ranges rom . o ., weigh is average. As several sudies imply,


27/41

Key words: cogniivism, Goodman, corisol, endorphins

The idea ha ar is valuable as a source o knowledge was mossrongly promoed by he American philosopher Nelson Goodman:“A cenral hesis o my book is ha ar has o be aken as seriouslyas science, i.e. as a means o discovering, ormaion and develop-men o knowledge in a broader sense o developmen o cogni-ion”. (Goodman , )

One o he objecives o cogniive aesheics is a quesionwheher and how we can learn rom ar. I is eviden wihou anydeeper analysis, righ on he firs level o hinking ha we learnrom ar — we can gain various inormaion rom novels, picuresand sculpures. However, his random inormaion does no rep-resen he ineres o our research, is no an inegral bu arbirarypar o a work. According o G. Graham, here is a more inegralrelaion beween ar and cogniion in works o ar, eachings arepresened in hem inenionally. (Graham )

Ariss oen atemp o bring messages. Thereore, we disin-guish works o ar which “only” presen somehing and worksmediaing o us beter comprehension o somehing. O course,ar bearing a message is requenly propaganda, i.e. advancing ocerain ideology. The propaganda persuades by he mos effecivemeans which are a is disposal, while learning persuades hroughcriical and conemplaing comprehension. Ar does no provide

end o consider hem o be more inelligen, rusworhy, menallyhealhy, sociable, suiable or parnership, cooperaion and so on.As Démuhová (Démuhová, ) assers, o a cerain exen, i isa consequence o a so–called halo effec when we le ourselves beinfluenced by a single posiive eaure during evaluaion o a wholeperson. Woman’ s atraciveness is a prerequisie o her marriage(or finding a parner) and also o a social–economic saus o herparner. We can legiimaely assume ha women compee or menwih a high saus which hey will be able o inves ino heir chil-dren. Conrarily, when men wih a high saus choose heir par-ners inersexual selecion dominaes. Thereore hey chose par-

ners wih a high reproducion value (wais–o–hip raio o ., BMI,age, and overall healh).


BUSS, D.M.: Evoluion of Desire: Sraegies O Human Maing. Basic Books, .BARBER, N.: The Evoluionary Psychology of Physical Atraciveness: Sexual Selec-

ion and Human Morphology . In: Ehology and Sociobiology , –.

. Ar and Cogniion. Ar and Neuroscience


28/41

supporers han, or insance, expressivism. So how and in whaways does ar develop our cogniion? We have already menionedha works o ar do no represen explanaions o heories or sum-mary o acs; hey are raher imaginaive creaions which can be-come a par o ordinary experience.

Decision–making abou wha we like and dislike, wha is beau-iul or no is in he cenre o atenion o heoreical effor o arpsychologiss, sociologiss and aesheicians. Presen–day visu-alisaion mehods hrough which neuronal correlaes o aesheicdecision making can be ound enable o ge beyond boundaries ophilosophical and aesheic speculaions. (Koukolík, )

. Music

Our percepion o sounds or images is designed o enable us o cach

conrass on a sill background. This ac was very imporan rom

he evoluionary poin o view — since noicing o enemy’ s move-

men is probably he mos vial or survival. I we place a small child

or a monkey among loudspeakers and move a source o sound wih-

in a room by a sereo/mono swich, we can observe urning o head

owards he source o music. This is only an illusraion how percep-

ion works on a conras principle. Le us discuss evoluion a litle bi

longer — approximaely a housand–year old bone “flue”, rom

he period o Middle Palaeolihic was ound in Neanderhal camp

in Slovenia. I was probably made o a bear highbone. I has our

holes — a disance beween he second and hird hole is wice as

long as a disance beween he hird and ourh hole which does no

conradic ormaion o a whole one or a semione. I even implies

ha a scale o ha era was idenical wih oday’ s arrangemen. We

can assume ha basic musical orms are somehow predeermined

by a neurobiological subsrae which deermines heir orm.

For insance, also Chinese flues daed beween and BC have eigh holes in idenical arrangemen as presen–day fippleflues. (Höschl, )

us wih acual inormaion and should no represen appealingpropaganda, ye i helps our cogniion.

. Cogniivism

Theories based on he asserion ha ar is valuable because wecan learn hrough i we erm “cogniivism”. Cerainly, here can beound pleny o opposing atiudes in aesheics and heory o araccording o which developmen o our cogniion is he las hingwhich would be a par o ar.

For insance, he American aesheician Douglas N. Morgan be-

lieves ha i we consider ar o be a source o knowledge, we over-esimae is value and orcibly impose a orm on i ha i does nohave. He conribued o a discussion on cogniive significance oar by a commen saing ha in spie o he ac ha a lo o workso differen ypes o ar provide various pieces o knowledge, i hisknowledge deermined ar, he world would be even more wrech-ed han i is oday. (Morgan, )

Morgan opposes cogniivism in ar by he ac ha i we as-sign a cogniive ask o ar we do i because we misakenly assumeha we can choose only beween ar as enerainmen or ar asa compensaion or empirical knowledge. There is a leas onecouner–argumen o Morgan’ s asserion — Morgan assumed hacogniive imporance o a heory has o be expressed by erms oproposiional logic, i.e. eiher as singular or universal judgemens.Morgan argued by means o logic in he ollowing way:

— Every ruh has o be deniable.— One work o ar canno deny he oher one.— Thereore works o ar canno be a source o any kind o ruh.

(Morgan, )However, cogniivism in ar is no based on proposiional logic

argumenaion, according o heories o cogniivism, a work o aris no only beauiul and eneraining, bu i also conribues o ourcomprehension o realiy. Noneheless, his heory has much more


29/41

showed ha during his hrill rae o hear, breah and elecromy-ogram modifies. C

Documents

Cognitive Aesthetics