Abstract

The criticisms I address in this article provoke questions about the very nature of aesthetic discourse and its relation to scientific approach in art theory. In the article, I try to respond to the author who criticizes me for disliking avant-garde art and, worse, contemporary aesthetics. I also try to explain that I am not a biological determinist, that I do not consider art an evolutionary adaptation, that I do not practice reductionism, and that I know how evolutionary mechanisms work. I also describe the reasons why the contemporary aesthetics, which the critic represents, is afraid of being scientific, and what this has to do with the need for prestige and belonging to the art world.