Week 2

1. For each video list/discuss the key concepts you learned.

For the Carta video Changeux ties in human evolution to art's evolution.  He also analyzes the human brain and it's responses to different feelings such as aesthetic judgement and surprise.  He looks at different parts of the brain and points out where the brain's activity is during these feelings.  Ramachandran gave a much better presentation. He also talks a lot about the brain and its responses to different feelings.  I really liked his analogy of the birds beak and our reaction to works of abstract art.  With the Aesthetics Philosophy of the Arts video I learned about the history of the philosophers all the way back from Plato to the present time.  I also learned about their contributions to Aesthetics.

2. Which philosopher's theory on aesthetics do you feel is most important? Be sure to mention the philosophers name, era (time in history), and contribution to the aesthetic theory in your response.  I think that Kant's theory on Aesthetics seemed to be important.  His time in history was the late 1700's and his contribution to aesthetic theory lies in his judgment of beauty and that he had influenced romanticism.  

3. What do you think about Changeux and Ramachandran scientific view of aesthetics and art? What was the most interesting fact you discovered from each speakers lecture?  Ramachandran really made it easy for me to understand his view on Aesthetics.  He talks about the brain's reaction to real life events and compares them to our brain's response to while looking at art.  I really liked how Changeux tied in the evolution of humans and the evolution of art.  They both go so far to look at the brain's activity and responses to looking at art.

4. How do the videos relate to the readings in the text?  They expand on aesthetics and give a much more detailed history of it and identify the important philosophers in history and their different theories on aesthetics.

5. What is your opinion of the films? How do they add depth to understanding of the topics in your reading?
I think that they added a lot of depth and gave much more specific detail on Aesthetics.  I also think that they were too long and, other than Ramachandran, were very boring.  I would have preferred to read the material and feel that I could have processed it much better if I read it.  I also found it very difficult to understand Changeux.