On 11th and 12th of October the Department of Philosophy at the University of York hosted an international conference on the topic of Art and the Nature of Belief, organised by Helen Bradley and Ema Sullivan-Bissett. The aim of the conference was to bring together philosophers of mind working on belief and its connection to truth with aestheticians working on beliefs gained from artworks.
We thought that there was an opportunity for a significant philosophical interaction between belief theorists and aestheticians which would illuminate the nature of belief for both parties. The interaction was intended to present the belief theorist with pertinent questions regarding the status of beliefs formed as a result of engaging with art and, in turn, encourage aestheticians to further consider the relations between art, belief, and truth.
Network members Greg Currie (University of York) and Anna Ichino (University of Nottingham) then co-presented their paper āGetting (More or Less) Rational Beliefs from Fictionā, Anna has blogged about their paper for imperfect cognitions here.
James Young (University of Victoria) then gave his paper āArt, Perspectives, and Justified Beliefsā, in which he argued that the experience-taking which can take place when we engage in fiction, can give rise to not only beliefs, but justified beliefs.
Next we had a session on alief, beginning with Maria Forsberg (Stockholm University) presenting her paper āExplaining Phenomenological Proximity in Painting ā on the Nature of the Causally Active Mental Statesā, in which she argued that an appeal to alief could explain the phenomenological difference between experiencing an original painting, and experiencing a copy of that same painting. This was followed by Allan Hazlett (University of Edinburgh) giving his paper āAlief that Amounts to Knowledgeā in which he argued that some aliefs which come about as a result of engaging with fiction can amount to knowledge, in those cases where such aliefs stand in the right relationship with the facts.
Peter Lamarque (University of York) finished off the first day of the conference with his paper āHow Fiction Shapes Beliefā. Here Peter argued that the content of a work of fiction is constituted by its mode of presentation, so content is identified opaquely in the narrative, under the perspective of narrative description.
The second day of the conference was opened by Lucy OāBrien (University College London) with a paper entitled āNovels as a Source of Self-Knowledgeā. Lucy argued that we form beliefs when we engage in fiction, some of which are about ourselves, and which are epistemically respectable, because both the content of novels can act as evidence, as can our reactions to those contents.
We then had a session on aesthetic testimony. The session started with Daniel Whiting (University of Southampton) giving his paper āRational Belief and Aesthetic Testimonyā in which he put forward a new argument for pessimism (the view that one cannot acquire aesthetic knowledge via testimony). Jon Robson (University of Nottingham) then gave his paper āAgainst Aesthetic Exceptionalismā arguing that there are no good arguments for pessimism.
Our final session started with Geert Gooskens (University of Antwerp) presenting his paper āPhotography and Trustā in which he questioned the assumption that seeing a photograph of p is a good reason to believe that p whilst seeing a handmade picture of p is not a good reason to believe that p. Geert wanted to show that in both cases (not just the latter), a āleap of faithā is involved on the part of the viewer.
Eva-Maria Konrad (University of Regensburg) closed the conference with her paper āSignposts of Factuality: On Genuine Assertions in Fictional Literatureā. In this paper she presented a theory of fictionality which she claimed solved the problem of how we can gain knowledge from literature even though literary works are, at least sometimes, fictional works.
All twelve speakers really embraced the conference theme, and the useful interaction we envisaged was exactly achieved. We would like to thank them again for making the conference such a success.