Product Description
'Like Dewey, he has revolted against the empiricist dogma and the Kantian dualisms which have compartmentalized philosophical thought...Unlike Dewey, he has provided detailed incisive argumentation, and has shown just where the dogmas and dualisms break down' - Richard Rorty, "The Yale Review". ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Influential Errors
Languages of Art is one of the most influential books in the field of aesthetics to be published in the past fifty years.I only read it recently, and as I did so I became aware of how often I had come across resonances of this book in art reviews and essays in art history ever since I first began reading such things.

This influence is unfortunate, because in his treatment of visual art, Goodman makes some sensational errors.

In short, Goodman claims, and attempts to prove, that resemblance is irrelevant to representational art.In other words, that portrait of Aunt Maud is not a good likeness because it looks like her, but because the artist has effectively deployed a system of symbols, more or less equivalent to language, that both artist and viewer have been acculturated to accept as constituting a "likeness."Never mind the fact that the colors and shapes in the portrait are remarkably similar to those on Aunt Maud's face. Goodman assures the reader that perceived resemblance has nothing to do with even the most realistic painting or sculpture.

Sometimes going against the grain of common sense yields astonishing insights.Other times, as in this book, it only makes the author look silly.

Read this book if you are interested in the background to a kind of extreme cultural relativism that has taken the field of art history by storm in the past twenty years.

Understand the philosophy of art
I read this book for a graduate seminar on the philosophy of art.In Nelson Goodmanfs book gLanguages of Art,h art is the subject of his philosophical inquiry, this diagram is a look at all the different features that show up.

Artist
Work-----------History
Audience «
Art world Creativity
Normalcy

This is just a straightforward examination of those things that go into the meaning of art.Then you have history to show that whatever is being displayed in this complex, which is not a complicated, organized whole, but a set of factors that inter relate with each other.Then you add history to ask who are the artists, what are the works, who is the audience, what is the art world and that will change over time.So, what is the meaning of art?Well there are different ways that art will have meaning in different periods and in different ways.All these factors have content in history.All are factors in art.The idea of creativity and normalcy is a factor in art too, because we would tend to think in some basic way.The whole point about art is that it is something creative.It is something that is special, and even if it were a readymade, the setting of it would prompt a special insight into this ordinary object.

Therefore, something about art is creative, and by creative, we mean something special, something new, something out of the ordinary.Thus, normalcy and creativity are kind of in tension with each other and he adds that they are in tension because that is a fact too.If there is a notion that there is something, wrong with normalcy, that is a ridiculous thing to say.First of all, where would the avant-garde be without normalcy for one thing.Because the whole point of the avant-garde is to be at odds with normalcy.Without normalcy, you canft have shock of the new.It is a negative relation, but it is still a relation.Normalcy doesnft have to be boring, just common ways of thinking and understanding that are a setting for a community.No human being could become a human being without the forces of normalcy in their lives.No human could grow into an avant-garde artist if they were not raised in normalcy under certain patterns and expectations.The only truly absolutely creative person is a person who is insane.And we define insanity as someone who can make no contact with us, they are on wavelength and there can be no communication.There could never be a philosophical proposal that normally is something unfortunate because that could not be, there canft be any culture, community, or development of a human being without some set of norms, some ways of behaving.People develop norms.There are ranges of creativity.Important works of art go against tradition.Creativity doesnft have to break boundaries like the avant-garde it could be like Mozart who worked within normal conventions of art.Tension between creativity and normalcy over time brings new normalcy.Creativity establishes new norms and ways of seeing thus pushing normalcy forward.The four factors complex; artists, work, audience, and art world go through changes over time and changes are brought about by tension between creativity and normalcy.

These four factors in tension they donft fit together really like puzzle pieces.These are factors that are identified as part of the meaning of art, but these factors themselves can be in tension.This can especially happen when it comes to the art world and creative artists, because very often creative artists run afoul of the institutional assumptions.Thus, they will be refused a show.In addition, there can be tension between the audience and the artist, the audience and the work, and the audience and the art world, these are pieces so to speak, but they are not puzzle pieces that fit together they are factors and forces themselves that have tensions.Whatever is going on, that is it all within the four factors.What is art?Or rather when and where is art.This is sort of a historical art world hermeneutic thing; to Goodman it is the most intellectually satisfying way to look at it.Not that the other theories donft have something to offer, but I find it intellectually satisfying because it covers so much, it is so comprehensive, nothing seems to be left out.Now someone says well where is your theory that identifies art?Well that is sort of the point Duchampfs greadymadeh was making art an institutional event, that is why Goodman thinks that the Fountain was a work of art that points to the institutional factor.That is at least one way to view it.Art is what the art world says it was throughout history sometimes that sounds circular, it is circular but it is not empty.Because when you look at anytime in history and between the four factors decisions were made.Capitalism liberated art from religious patronage.Artists are free agents now.This model is a way for finding results, but wonft give gah result.These are all dynamic elements; art is a continually contested notion then.Most theories didnft talk about audience and art world aspect of this four factor model.

I recommend this work for anyone interested in philosophy, philosophy of art.

construct.represerntation/reproduction
Languages of Art enables a person to review the deep structure ofaesthetics through symbolic diagram.Goodman presents/offers a model ofaesthetic production based on a flow from microperceptions into themacroperception of affect.He allows one to review the product ofaesthetic direction through symbolic structure based on folds. ... Read more

Product Description
Nelson Goodman's acceptance and critique of certain methods and tenets of positivism, his defence of nominalism and phenomenalism, his formulation of a new riddle of induction, his work on notational systems, and his analysis of the arts place him at the forefront of the history and development of American philosophy in the twentieth-century. However, outside of America, Goodman has been a rather neglected figure. In this first book-length introduction to his work Cohnitz and Rossberg assess Goodman's lasting contribution to philosophy and show that although some of his views may be now considered unfashionable or unorthodox, there is much in Goodman's work that is of significance today. The book begins with the "grue"-paradox, which exemplifies Goodman's way of dealing with philosophical problems. After this, the unifying features of Goodman's philosophy are presented - his constructivism, conventionalism and relativism - followed by an discussion of his central work, The Structure of Appearance and its significance in the analytic tradition.The following chapters present the technical apparatus that underlies his philosophy, his mereology and semiotics, which provides the background for discussion of Goodman's aesthetics. The final chapter examines in greater depth the presuppositions underlying his philosophy. ... Read more

Product Description

Here, in a new edition, is Nelson Goodman's provocative philosophical classic—a book that, according to Science, "raised a storm of controversy" when it was first published in 1954, and one that remains on the front lines of philosophical debate.

How is it that we feel confident in generalizing from experience in some ways but not in others? How ore generalizations that ore warranted to be distinguished from those that are not? Goodman shows that these questions resist formal solution and his demonstration has been taken by nativists like Chomsky and Fodor as proof that neither scientific induction nor ordinary learning can proceed without an a priori, or innate, ordering of hypotheses.

In his new foreword to this edition, Hilary Putnam forcefully rejects these nativist claims. The controversy surrounding these unsolved problems is as relevant to the psychology of cognitive development as it is to the philosophy of science. No serious student of either discipline can afford to misunderstand Goodman's classic argument.

Customer Reviews (2)

Simply brilliant!
Goodman starts out with an attempt to tackle the problem of interpreting counterfactuals ("What would happen if X would be the case instead of Y."). He doesn't solve the problem but gives some deep insights, especially on the connection between counterfactuals and scientific laws. In the next section he tries to tackle the problem by taking a look at a specific sort of counterfactuals, dispositional predicates. These are predicates like "flexibility" ("If I would bend this..."). He does tackle that problem. He doesn't use strange concepts like "possible worlds", that are more problematic than the original problem, but shows how dispositional predicates can be interpreted as statements about past observations, which reduces the problem to the good old problem of induction, which he adresses in the third section. He argues that Hume has solved the problem on how we can know that the future will behave like the past (we simply can't). The real question is not justifying induction but describing how it is done. Several people have attempted to do just that and Goodman discusses their work in some detail. He shows that there is a new, deeper problem: How can we separate theories about predicates ("All X are Y.") from these predicates. He constructs a strange predicate, grue, that is green until some future time t and blue afterwards. The theory "All emeralds are green." is as well supported as the theory "All emeralds are green." One can also construct "blue" and "green" from "bleen" and "grue", so the choice of predicates seems to be somewhat arbitrary. It is easy to construct similar predicates and noone has found a general way to rule them out yet. So how can we decide what predicates we should use in our theories? Goodman argues that this is pure convention, based on tradition. Not everyone will accept this answer (I don't), but this isn't necessary for seeing the brilliance of this work.

A new look at the problem of induction
This book is clearly written and undeniably rigorous.In his first chapters, Goodman examines problems in counterfactual conditionals and sets up the problem of what he calls 'projectibility'.But, it is the chapter entitled "The New Riddle of Induction" where the book takes off.In this chapter, Goodman takes the reader through, first, the common misconceptions of the problem of induction.The way that Goodman perceives our inductive system is unique and refreshingly simplistic.(John Rawls later names Goodman's picture 'reflective equilibrium'.)Next, Goodman takes you through a journey of rule-finding for our inductive system; which includes examining Hempel's famous Raven's Paradox.Goodman ends the journey with discovering his own paradox, which he calls his 'Grue' argument.He demonstrates that predicates like 'grue' are the lingering problem with constructing a valid inductive system.In his last chapter, Goodman attempts to resolve the grue dilemma.It is in this chapter that we see the full philosophic mind of Goodman.The depth and relentless thought that Goodman puts into this chapter will forever 'entrench' his name in the philosophic discipline. ... Read more

Product Description
'In a way reminiscent of Einstein, Goodman leads us to the very edge of relativism, only then to step back and to suggest certain criteria of fairness and rightness. More so than any other commentator, he has provided a workable notion of the kinds of skills and capacities that are central for anyone who works in the arts' - Howard Gardner, Harvard University. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Also called playing with metanarratives
"The non-Kantian theme of multiplicity of worlds is closely akin to the Kantian theme of the vacuity of the notion of pure content. The one denies us a unique world, the other the common stuff of which worlds are made. Together these theses defy our intuitive demand for something solid underneath, and threaten to leave us uncontrolled, spinning out our own inconsequent fantasies." (...) "Truth, far from being a solemn and severe master, is a docile and obedient servant. The scientist who supposes that he is single-mindedly dedicated to the search for truth deceives himself. He is unconcerned with the trivial truths he could grind out endlessly; and he looks to the multifaceted and irregular results of observations for little more than suggestions of overall structures and significant generalizations. He seeks system, simplicity, scope; and when satisfied on these scores he tailors truth to fit. He as much decrees as discovers the laws he sets forth, as much designs as discerns the patterns he delineates." (...) MY notes: this seems to exhibit the influence of the later Wittgenstein. There are several quotes to this effect. "...while readiness to recognize alternative worlds may be liberating, and suggestive of new avenues of exploration, a willingness to welcome all worlds builds none. ... A broad mind is no substitute for hard work." (p. 21) From the footnote on (...): "Even though a metaphorical statement may be literally false, metaphorical truth differs from metaphorical falsity much as literal truth differs from literal falsity."Chapter III is an interesting discussion of the nature of quotation which could come in handy during discussions of plagiarism. Chapter V - the puzzle about perception seems to deal with issues contemporary brain science has better answers for. But VI - The Fabrication of Facts looks like a good chapter. "...we must distinguish falsehood and fiction from truth and fact; but we cannot, I am sure, do it on the ground that fiction is fabricated and fact found." (...) There is a nice (and very useful) summary of the ancients searching for the arche from (...) (Some ancient worlds). Note the quote from "Professor" Woody Allen on (...) and G's interpretation of it. Here is something important I think: "Incidentally, recognition of multipleworlds or true versions suggests innocuous interpretations of necessity and possibility. A statement is necessary in a universe of worlds or true versions if true in all, necessarily false if true in none, and contingent or possible if true in some." (...)

Goodman and Anti-Realism
Goodman is neither a realist nor an anti-realist. He argues neither for nor against the existence of a real world out beyond all our knowledge and our active efforts to cope with our experiences. He calls himself an "irrealist," or someone who couldn't care less whether or not such a real world exists.

Ways of Worldmaking contains one brilliant argument after another for the idea that no appeal to a real world beyond our "conceptual schemes" is necessary to understand, or to produce, science and scientific knowledge. What's more, Goodman also shows how art is just as necessary as science if we are to understand ourselves and the world. He explains that neither art nor science is a copy of the world: as the old joke has it, "one of the damn things is enough." Instead both art and science succeed when they provide us with symbols that re-categorize things and people in ways we find useful.

It is this usefulness, not a connection to a world beyond all categories, that we actually seek when we generate both theories and artworks. Notice that we do in fact stop our seeking when we achieve this kind of satisfaction. Goodman's neo-pragmatic explanation of how we should investigate the world pays close attention, and gives proper respect, to the ways in which we actually do investigate.

A wonderful book from an underappreciated thinker.

Confusion
Although Goodman is generally attributed as on of the leaders of the Anti-Realist position, Ways of Worldmaking does not provide a good argument for that position.Goodman's talk is highly open to interpretation, butmost interpretations lead to trivial truth or outlandishly bizarrescenarios.The lack of detailed argument makes refutation difficult, butstill it is a must read for those interested in what Anti-Realism is. ... Read more

Product Description

Of Mind and Other Matters displays perhaps more vividly than any one of Nelson Goodman's previous books both the remarkable diversity of his concerns and the essential unity of his thought.

Many new studies are incorporated in the book, along with material, often now augmented or significantly revised, that he has published during the last decade. As a whole the volume will serve as a concise introduction to Goodman's thought for general readers, and will develop its more recent unfoldings for those philosophers and others who have grown wiser with his books over the years.

Goodman transcends the narrow “scientism and humanism that set the sciences and the arts in opposition”; his insights derive from both formal philosophy and cognitive psychology. As Hilary Putnam has noted, Goodman “prefers concrete and partial progress to grand and ultimately empty visions”; and here are illuminating studies of topics ranging from science policy and museum administration and art education to narrative in literature and painting and the analysis of elusive aspects of literal and metaphorical reference. All these are ramifications of Goodman’s profound and often revolutionary philosophical work on the ways we understand and even make the worlds we live in.

Product Description

Product Description

Nelson Goodman’s disparate writings are often written about only within their own particular discipline, such that the epistemology is discussed in contrast to others’ epistemology, the aesthetics is contrasted with more traditional aesthetics, and the ontology and logic is viewed in contrast to both other contemporary philosophers and to Goodman’s historical predecessors. This book argues that that is not an adequate way to view Goodman. The separate disciplines of ontology, epistemology, and aesthetics should be viewed as sequential steps within his thought, such that each provides the ground rules for the next section and, furthermore, providing the reasons for limitations on the terms available to the subsequent writing(s). This is true not merely because this is the general chronology of his writing, but more importantly because within his metaphysics lies Goodman’s basic nominalist ontology and logic, and it is upon those principles that he builds his epistemology and, furthermore, it is the sum of both the metaphysics and the epistemology, with the nominalist principle as the guiding force, which constructs the aesthetics. At the end of each section of this book, the consequent limitations imposed on his terms and concepts available to him are explicated, such that, by the end of the book, the book delineates the constraints imposed upon the aesthetics by both the metaphysics and the epistemology.

This book will benefit not only the professionals in the field of philosophy, but will also help both graduate and upper level undergraduate students understand Goodman’s disparate writings within their proper context, and hopefully will also encourage them to view philosophical thinking in a less truncated and departmentalized way.

Product Description
"Our only channel of information about the world is the impact of external forces on our sensory surfaces. So says science itself. There is no clairvoyance. How, then, can we have parlayed this meager sensory input into a full-blown scientific theory of the world? This is itself a scientific question. The pursuit of it, with free use of scientific theory, is what I call naturalized epistemology. The Roots of Reference falls within that domain. Its more specific concern, within that domain, is reference to concrete and abstract objects: what such reference consists in, and how we achieve it.

"Part I is a statement of general psychological presumptions regarding perception and learning. The underlying notions of cause and disposition are examined in a philosophical spirit. In Part II those considerations are brought to bear more particularly on the learning of language.

"Part II comes firmly to grips with the nature of reification and reference. The process is inseparable from language, and unequivocally identifiable only to the degree that the language resembles ours in certain structural respects. Stages of reification are sorted out, rudimentary to full-fledged. The full phase is heralded by the use of the relative clause with its relative pronoun and subsidiary pronouns. It is these pronouns that recur in logical notation as the bound variables of quantification.

"Part III concludes with a conjectural sketch of the development of reification in the race and the individual. Especial attention is directed to the positing of abstract objects: properties, classes, numbers. It is traced in large part to the serendipity of fruitful confusions. Truth, after all, can issue fromfallacious proofs; to condemn the outcome for its fallacious origin is simply to add the genetic fallacy to what had gone before. Let us count our blessings". ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

available soon
book is due to be reprinted by Open Court in September 199 ... Read more