Beauty, a Road to the Truth

In this article I give a naturalistic-cum-formal analysis of the relation between beauty, empirical success, and truth. The analysis is based on the one hand on a hypothetical variant of the so-called 'mere-exposure effect' which has been more or less established in experimental psychology...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Synthese (Dordrecht) 2002-06, Vol.131 (3), p.291-328
Main Author: Kuipers, Theo A. F.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aesthetic simplicity
Aesthetics
Approximation
Beauty
Counterexamples
Cultural values
Dissertations & theses
Empiricism
Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge
Experimental psychology
Hands
Libraries
Logic
Musical aesthetics
Observational terms
Philosophers
Philosophy
Philosophy of science
Psychology
Realism
Revolutions
Scientists
Theory
Translation
Truth
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In this article I give a naturalistic-cum-formal analysis of the relation between beauty, empirical success, and truth. The analysis is based on the one hand on a hypothetical variant of the so-called 'mere-exposure effect' which has been more or less established in experimental psychology regarding exposure-affect relationships in general and aesthetic appreciation in particular (Zajonc 1968; Temme 1983; Bornstein 1989; Ye 2000). On the other hand it is based on the formal theory of truthlikeness and truth approximation as presented in my "From Instrumentalism to Constructive Realism" (2000). The analysis supports the findings of James McAllister in his beautiful "Beauty and Revolution in Science" (1996), by explaining and justifying them. First, scientists are essentially right in regarding aesthetic criteria useful for empirical progress and even for truth approximation, provided they conceive of them as less hard than empirical criteria. Second, the aesthetic criteria of the time, the 'aesthetic canon', may well be based on 'aesthetic induction' regarding nonempirical features of paradigms of successful theories which scientists have come to appreciate as beautiful. Third, aesthetic criteria can play a crucial, schismatic role in scientific revolutions. Since they may well be wrong, they may, in the hands of aesthetic conservatives, retard empirical progress and hence truth approximation, but this does not happen in the hands of aesthetically flexible, 'revolutionary' scientists.
ISSN:0039-7857
1573-0964
DOI:10.1023/A:1016188509393