|
Literature as a source of knowledge| old_uid | 10540 |
|---|
| title | Literature as a source of knowledge |
|---|
| start_date | 2011/12/09 |
|---|
| schedule | 14h30-16h30 |
|---|
| online | no |
|---|
| summary | There is a long tradition among critics, theorists, philosophers, and the reading public of believing that great literature offers important insights into the mind--insights unavailable from other sources. I do not know whether this is true or not, though I strongly suspect that there is some truth in it. However, the claim on behalf of knowledge from literature is generally not very clearly stated by its advocates, including recent philosophical ones like Martha Nussbaum. It is also unclear what evidence advocates would bring forward to support the claim, other than their own inner conviction. I hold that, if the claim is to be made out, it must be supported by appropriate experimental studies. Presently there are very few such studies available. In the absence of good empirical evidence we are thrown back on considerations of plausibility. I consider some general arguments which, while they do not refute the claim that literature is a significant source of knowledge, do suggest that it is not well suited to being such a source. |
|---|
| responsibles | de Vignemont |
|---|
| |
|