Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We review 4E (embodied, embedded, extended and enactive) approaches to the analysis of art and aesthetic experience. We argue that extended mind analyses that focus on tool use miss important aspects, and that it requires 4 or more E’s to address the broad spectrum of aesthetic experiences that correlate to the broad variety of artistic genres. We develop an enactive, affordance-based approach to understanding art and aesthetic experience. Considering both the potential and the limitations of any particular approach, we argue that there is no one unified set of principles that will make sense of all art everywhere.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Burnett et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: