The possibility of a bridge. perspectives and limitations of neuroaesthetics

Abstract

In the traditional study of humanities non-humanitarian input into the study of culture has usually been rejected. According to humanist theories, only the meanings and values derived from history and culture can be attributed to art. Recently a discipline known as neuroaesthetics has risen to the fore from among the various disciplines that use non-humanitarian methods to approach the subject of aesthetics. Triggered by the invention of various technological devices (EEG, fMRI, PET), neuroaesthetics is now being used to tackle the role of the brain in the processes of creation, reception and even thinking about arts. When introducing new perspectives, such as neuroaesthetics, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of the different methods. A narrow reductional approach to art and the brain clearly does not suffice-a satisfactory explanation must also involve non-physical factors, such as knowledge about the history of art. On the other hand, as with any theoretical approach, the explanatory capacity of neuroaesthetics varies when applied to different kinds of art. Neuroaesthetic theories tend to stress the visual, mimetic and emotional nature of art, often associating artistic features with the activity of the visual brain as well as evolutionary psychology. Instead of stressing historic and local differences and cultural exceptions, researchers with a natural sciences background tend to search for the universal qualities of art. This appears to be irreconcilable with the institutional theory of art that implicitly underlies the entire contemporary paradigm of art. It can be assumed that some of the reasoning behind the sceptical attitude shared by most mainstream humanitarian discourse is hidden in this conflict. It can even be claimed that, under the banner of institutionalist ideas, the art of the modernist period constituted a systematic negation of the conditions of art prescribed by the universal qualities of art based on the laws of the brain. Therefore, one of the challenges in this early phase of the biologically and psychologically based analysis of art should be to shed light on this inherent and ideological bias that is deeply rooted in the humanistic discourse of arts.