xplain scientific cognitivism and how proponents of such a view would explain our aesthetic appreciation of the Grand Canyon
– Explain the Idea, Address the prompt in the Q, Talk about the argument or any other supporting question, ALL IN YOUR OWN WORDS.
– DO NOT use Quotes!!!
– Be sure to answer all portions of the prompt!
– Each question answer should be elaborated
– Chapters 5-8
1. Explain what a paradox is and then explain the particular issues the paradox of fiction highlights. List the three premises of the paradox of fiction. Describe one of the responses to the paradox covered in class and identify which premise it targets. Be sure to fully explain the response! Do you agree with the response you explained? Why or why not?
2. What is the issue that the moralist and autonomist disagree about? Explain what the general position of the moralist is and then explain the general position of the autonomist. Describe one particular moderate moralist view and give an example of when a work would be deemed to be immoral on that specific account. Be sure to fully explain view! Do you agree with the moralist or the autonomist, and why?
3. What is cultural appropriation? Name at least two different kinds of appropriation and give a description of each along with an original example of each (ones not found in the book or lecture). Identify and explain the two conditions when cultural appropriation causes problems that James O. Young discusses. What is the distinction Young makes between reasonable and unreasonable offense? Give an example of each.
4. Explain at least two ways that it was argued that experiencing nature is different than experiencing works of art. Why must we treat natural objects different than artworks? Explain scientific cognitivism and how proponents of such a view would explain our aesthetic appreciation of the Grand Canyon (be specific!). How would a proponent of one of the non-cognitivist theories presented (specify which theory) respond to the scientific cognitivist in this specific example? Do you agree with the scientific cognitivist, or the non-cognitivist, and why?