Print

Environmental aesthetics

DOI
10.4324/9780415249126-M047-1
Versions
DOI: 10.4324/9780415249126-M047-1
Version: v1,  Published online: 1998
Retrieved December 12, 2018, from https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/environmental-aesthetics/v-1

7. Conclusion

Although the engagement and related approaches and the cognitive approach have different emphases in addressing basic questions about the aesthetic experience of the world at large, they are not necessarily in conflict with one another. There is no theoretical conflict between them since each apparently proposes only necessary, not sufficient, conditions for achieving aesthetic appreciation of everyday environments. Nonetheless, there is perhaps some practical tension between the two kinds of approaches, owing to the appreciative difficulty of being totally engaged with objects of appreciation and yet at the same time taking into account knowledge relevant to their appreciation. However, this kind of bringing together and balancing of feeling and knowing is at the heart of any aesthetic experience and is, moreover, that which is expected in the serious, appropriate aesthetic appreciation of works of art. That aesthetic appreciation of everyday environments requires the same kind of achievement demonstrates that different environments of the world at large are as aesthetically rich as are the very best works of art.

Print
Citing this article:
Carlson, Allen. Conclusion. Environmental aesthetics, 1998, doi:10.4324/9780415249126-M047-1. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/environmental-aesthetics/v-1/sections/the-aesthetics-of-human-environments-and-everyday-life.
Copyright © 1998-2018 Routledge.

Related Articles