Aesthetic and Other Theoretical Virtues in Science

Jason B. Simus

doi:10.4299/asage.v1i2.26

Abstract

Here I first provide an introduction to a neglected topic in contemporary aesthetics: intellectual beauty. Then I review James McAllister?s critique of autonomism and reductionism regarding the relation between empirical and aesthetic criteria in scientific theory evaluation. Finally, I critique McAllister?s ?aesthetic induction,? and defend an alternative model that emphasizes the holistic coherence of aesthetic and other theoretical virtues in scientific theorizing.

Highlights

In 1964, Harold Osborne lamented that nowadays the concept of intellectual beauty is not, I believe, commonly repudiated so much as neglected; few of the standard works on aesthetics pay more than lip-service to it and I know of none which has either attempted a deep analysis or given to it equal weight with sensory beauties in the framing of general aesthetic concepts.1Osborne’s lamentation still rings true today
As many times as we hear of a “beautiful” scientific theory or an “elegant” mathematical proof, intellectual beauty is largely ignored in contemporary aesthetics
Because scientists readily admit making aesthetic judgments in positing hypotheses and evaluating theories, most of what has been written on intellectual beauty comes from them, not philosophers or aestheticians

Summary

INTRODUCTION

In 1964, Harold Osborne lamented that nowadays the concept of intellectual beauty is not, I believe, commonly repudiated so much as neglected; few of the standard works on aesthetics pay more than lip-service to it and I know of none which has either attempted a deep analysis or given to it equal weight with sensory beauties in the framing of general aesthetic concepts.. As many times as we hear of a “beautiful” scientific theory or an “elegant” mathematical proof, intellectual beauty is largely ignored in contemporary aesthetics. As Thomas Kuhn showed us, there seems to be a gap between normative ideas about scientific methodology and the reality of how scientists practice their art.. Because scientists readily admit making aesthetic judgments in positing hypotheses and evaluating theories, most of what has been written on intellectual beauty comes from them, not philosophers or aestheticians.. Paying critical attention to McAllister’s views, I first provide a brief historical background regarding the notion of intellectual beauty and some of the primary distinctions involved therein. I look to McAllister’s critique of autonomist and reductionist views of the relation between empirical and aesthetic criteria in theory evaluation for science. I provide a critique of what he calls the “aesthetic induction” and defend an alternative model that emphasizes the holistic coherence of aesthetic and other theoretical virtues in scientific theorizing

INTELLECTUAL BEAUTY

EMPIRICAL VERSUS AESTHETIC CRITERIA IN THEORY EVALUATION

HOLISM IN SCIENTIFIC THEORY EVALUATION