1. Introduction to aesthetics

2. Introduction to Aesthetics
What is Aesthetics?
Aesthetics
Some Questions
Normative

3. Introduction to Aesthetics
Spectrum of Aesthetics
Introduction
Absolutism
Objectivism
Relativism
Subjectivism
Moral Nihilism
Moral Skepticism
Aestheticians, Art Critics and Artists

4. Aesthetics Reasoning Statements of Value vs Statements of Fact
Value Statements/matters of value
Factual statements/matters of fact
Objective and subjective statements
Objective-subjective dispute
Non-objectivity and reasoning

5. Aesthetics Reasoning Aesthetic Issue Facts Issue Resolution Components
Relevant Facts
Agreement & Disagreement
Resolution of Factual Issues

6. Ethical Reasoning Concepts Aesthetics/Values Values & Facts
Relevant Concepts
Agreement & Disagreement
Resolution of Conceptual Issues
Aesthetics/Values
Morality
Resolution
Values & Facts
Value Statements/Matters of Value
Factual Statements/Matters of Fact

7. Ethical Reasoning Objectivity & Subjectivity Objective Statement
Subjective Statement
Objective-Subjective Dispute

8. Argument Basics

9. Argument Basics Argument Concepts Defined
General Assessment: Reasoning
General Assessment: Are the Premises True?

10. Deductive Arguments Introduction to Deductive Arguments
Defined
Use
Assessment
Valid/Invalid, Sound/Unsound
Some Common Valid Deductive Arguments
Reductio Ad Adsurdum
Form #1/Form #2
Example

11. Inductive Arguments Introduction to Inductive Arguments Defined
Assessment
Strong & Weak Arguments

12. Analogical Argument Introduction Form Definition Uses Informal
Strict Form
Premise 1: X has properties P, Q, and R.
Premise 2: Y has properties P, Q, and R.
Premise 3: X has property Z as well.
Conclusion: Y has property Z.

13. Analogical Argument Assessment The strength of the argument depends on
The number of properties X & Y have in common.
The relevance of the shared properties to Z.
Whether X & Y have relevant dissimilarities.
Example

14. Argument from/by Example
Introduction
Defined
Form
Informal
Premise 1: Example 1 is an example that supports claim P.
Premise 2: Example 2 is an example that supports claim P.
Premise n: Example n is an example that supports claim C.
Conclusion: Claim P is true.

15. Argument from/by Example
Standards of Assessment
Standards
The more examples, the stronger the argument.
The examples must be relevant.
The examples must be specific & clearly identified.
Counter-examples must be considered.

16. Argument from Authority
Introduction
Defined
Use
Form
Premise 1: Person A is an authority on subject S.
Premises 2: Person A makes claim C about subject S.
Premises 3: Therefore, C is true.

17. Argument from Authority
Assessment
Standards
The person has sufficient expertise in the subject.
The claim is within the expert’s area of expertise.
There is an adequate degree of agreement among experts.
The expert is not significantly biased.
The area of expertise is a legitimate area or discipline.
The authority must be properly cited.

18. Logical Consistency(General)
Concepts & Method
Responding
Ethical Relativism, Subjectivism & Nihilism

19. Consistent Application (Normative)
Concepts, Assumptions & Method
Responding

20. Reversing the Situation(Ethics)
Method
Considerations
Responding

21. Argument by Definition (General)
Method
Assessing Definitions
Responding

22. Appeal to Intuition
Method
Responding

23. Appeal to Consequences(Normative)
Method
Moral Vs. Practical
Responding
Step 1: Show that action, policy, etc. X creates Y harms and Z benefits.
Step 2: Weigh and assess Y and Z.
Step 3: Argue that moral assessment is based on the consequences of actions.
Step 4A: If Y outweighs Z, then conclude that X is morally unacceptable.
Step 4B: If Z outweighs Y, then conclude that X is morally acceptable.

24. Appeal to Rights (Ethics)
Method
Responding
Method 1
Step 1: Argue for right Y.
Step 2: Argue that. X violates (or does not violate) right Y.
Step 3: Conclude that X is not morally acceptable (or is acceptable).
Method 2
Step 1: Argue for right Y.
Step 2: Argue that. X is required by right Y.
Step 3: Conclude that X is morally obligatory.

25. Mixing Norms Flawed Method Correct Method Making the Connection
Flawed Step 1: X has status S in normative area Y.
Flawed Step 2: Therefore X should have the comparable status to S in normative area Z.
Correct Method
Step 1: X has status S in normative area Y.
Step 2: Premise or Argument connecting area Y and normative area Z.
Step 3: Therefore X should have the comparable status to S in normative area Z.
Making the Connection
Responding

26. Applying Aesthetic Principles
Method
Sample Principles
Responding
Art & Non-Art

27. Applying Aesthetic Theories
Method
Responding