1

HPSC0111–Science,ArtandPhilosophy

CourseSyllabus

2018-19session|DrChiaraAmbrosio|Emailaddressc.ambrosio@ucl.ac.uk

CourseInformation

BasiccourseinformationCoursewebsite:

n/a

MoodleWebsite:

Search“HPSC0111–Science,ArtandPhilosophy”(enrolmentkey:“Darwin”)

This module explores the interactions between science and art from the mid-nineteenth century to the present. Its philosophical focus is the notion of "representation", conceived as a crucial common link between scientific and artistic visual practices. Integrating the history and philosophy of scientific and artistic representations, the course will address a broad range of issues. These will include questions on the nature and role of visual representations in scientific and artistic practice, what counts as "objective" and "accurate" representation, when and how images count as "evidence", and whether the relations between science and modernism contribute to overturn the common sense view that "art invents, science discovers".

2

Assessment: Seeseparate“assessment”section

Timetable: www.ucl.ac.uk/timetable

Remembertocheckyourpersonaltimetableregularlyforthevenueoflecturesandtutorials.

Note:someofthelectureswillbebasedinmuseumsandgalleries.Pleaserefertotheweeklyschedulebelowforfurtherdetails.

Prerequisites: none

Requiredtexts: Seeseparatereadinglists

Coursetutor(s): ChiaraAmbrosio

Contact: c.ambrosio@ucl.ac.uk;officephone02076790166

Web:

Officelocation: Room1.2a,22GordonSquare

Officehours:

Schedule1

UCLWeek Topic DateReading(seedetailedweeklyreadinglistbelow)

20 Moduleintroduction–WhyRepresentations? 10Jan Kern

21 Denotation,ConventionandtheRiddleofStyle(ArtMuseumLecture)

17Jan GoodmanorGombrich

22 Representation, Classification and the OrderofThings

24Jan Foucault

23 Truth-to-Nature(ArtMuseumLecture) 31Jan DastonandGalison

24 RepresentationinPhilosophyofScience 7Feb Suárez

25 Readingweek 14Feb

26 Representation in the Age of MechanicalReproduction(TutorialsintheArtMuseum)

21Feb DastonandGalison

27 ModernistVisions 28Feb HendersonorGalison

28 RepresentingTime:SerialityandDuration(TutorialsintheArtMuseum)

7Mar Canales

29 VisualisationLostandRegained 14Mar Galison

30 TheFutureofRepresentations 21Mar DastonandGalison

1Forfurtherinformationregardingassessments(includingwordcounts,latesubmissionsandpossiblepenalties)pleaserefertotheSTSappropriateprogrammepagei.eB.ScorM.Sc

3

Assessments

Summary

Description Deadline

Wordlimit DeadlineforTutorstoprovideFeedback

Coursework140%

JournalarticleinthestyleofLeonardomagazine

1April 250025April

Coursework240% Poster

8April n/a 1May

Coursework320% Posterpresentation

26AprilNorthCloistersfrom1.30pm

10minutes7May

Pleasenote:UCL’sservicestandardforreturningfeedbackisfourweeksfromthesubmissionofyourcoursework.Thedeadlinesforfeedbackaboveaimatreturningyourfeedbackwithintwoweeks (14working days). Theremaybedelays on thedeadlines abovedependingonunforeseen circumstances at the time of marking, but even in that case I aim to returnfeedbackwithinthreeweeksatthelatest.SpecificCriteriaforAssessmentforthisModule:The assessment for this course is project-based. This means that you will have to do thethinkingonce,and settleona topicyouwill research throughout the term.Yourprojectwillthenbeassessedinthreeways:awrittenpiece(Leonardoarticle),avisualpiece(poster)andanoralcomponent(presentation).Thismightseemdemanding,butthereismethodintheapparentmadnessofthisassessment.Thethreeformsofassessmentarepedagogicallycomplementary,andtheyaimtofosteralltheskills(criticalthinking,visualthinking/object-basedresearch,oralargumentation)wecultivatedinthemodule.Theseareskillsyouwillneed in lifenomatterwhatcareeryouwilldecidetoembark on. And you will be able to use the poster and article in your portfolios for jobapplications, while the presentation will build your confidence in public speaking for jobinterviews.Detailed informationontheassessment isavailableonmoodle.Lookatthe“project survivalguide”and“posterguidance”documentsintheassessmenttabonmoodle.

4

Aims&objectivesAims: Theaimofthiscourseistoexplorethenotionof“representation”asacruciallinkbetweenscientific and artistic visual practices. Drawing on a variety of interpretative tools fromanalytical and continental philosophical traditions, the course will address a range ofphilosophicalquestionsarisingfromtheparallelhistoriesofrepresentationsinscienceandart. These will include issues concerning the nature and role of visual representations inscientific and artistic practice, what counts as “objective” and “accurate” representation,whenandhowimagescountas“evidence”,andwhethertherelationsbetweenscienceandmodernism contribute to overturn the common sense view that “art invents, science

discovers”.ObjectivesBytheendofthecourse,studentswillhaveacquired the necessary analytical andinterpretativetoolstoengagecriticallywitha broad range of visual materials and toestablish interdisciplinaryparallelsbetweenvisualrepresentations inscienceand inthevisualarts.

ModuleplanTeachingformat:Thiscoursecomprisesatwo-hourlecture(Wednesdays)andaone-hourseminar(Fridays).Ineachlecture,Iwillexplainthereadingsassignedforthecurrentweek.Insomecases,Imightgiveyouachoicebetweentwoorthreeoptionalreadings,andyouwillbeexpectedtoreadtheminpreparationfortheseminarsonFridays.For each seminar, I would like you to find a representation that will stimulate furtherthoughtsanddiscussiononthereadings.By“representation”Imeananobject,image,video,piece of music or anything else of your choice that might be relevant to the readingsassignedeachweek.Iwouldlikeyoutopitchtheobjectforacoupleofminutes,andwewillthen discuss with the rest of the class how the object connects to the readings for aparticularweek.FortutorialsthattakeplaceintheArtMuseum(afterreadingweek),Iwillprovideobjectsondisplay,andyouwillhaveto linkthemtothereadingsfortherelevantweeks.

5

After readingweekwewill run two tutorial sessions on poster design and assessment ingeneral. As in professional academic practice, the poster, short article and presentationwhichformyourassignmentarecomplementarytoeachotherandshouldbeapproachedasacoherentandunifiedresearchproject.Moredetailsonthiswillbegiveninthelecturesandseminars.PleaserefertotheadditionaldocumentsonmoodlefortheformatoftheposterandforfurtherdetailsonwhatisrequiredforthearticleinthestyleofthejournalLeonardo.WeeklySchedulewithReadingsLecture1–Thursday10JanuaryIntroduction:WhyRepresentations? Requiredreadings:Stephen Kern, The Culture of Time and Space 1880-1914,Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress,1983.(Introduction;Chapter1“TheNatureofTime”and/orChapter6“TheNatureofSpace”).Part1.Howdorepresentations“represent”?Lecture2–Thursday17JanuaryDenotation,ConventionandtheRiddleofStyle[Note:ThislecturewilltakeplaceattheUCLArtMuseum]RequiredReadings:Chooseoneofthefollowing:NelsonGoodman,LanguagesofArt.Indianapolis:Hackett,1976.(Introduction;Chapter1“RealityRemade”.Youmightwant toconsideralso the followingextractsfromchapter2:“Exemplification”(pp.52-57)and“SamplesandLabels”(pp.57-68).ErnstGombrich,ArtandIllusionLondon:Phaidon,1960.(“PsychologyandtheRiddleofStyle”(introduction);Chapter2“TruthandtheStereotype”)FurtherReadings:On/byNelsonGoodman

6

• NelsonGoodman,WaysofWorldmaking,NewYork:Hackett,1978.• Douglas Arrell, “What Goodman Should Have Said about Representation”, in The

JournalofAestheticandArtCriticism,vol.4,no.1(1987),pp.41-49.(alsoreprintedinElgin1997,below).

• Catherine Z. Elgin, Nelson Goodman’s Philosophy of Art. (New York: GarlandPublishing,1997).

• Alessandro Giovannelli, “Goodman’s Aesthetics”, The Stanford Encyclopedia ofPhilosophy (Summer 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/goodman-aesthetics/

• Richard Rudner (ed.). Logic and Art: Essays in Honor of Nelson Goodman.(Indianapolis:BobbsMerrill,1972)

On/byErnstGombrich

• ErnstGombrich,MeditationsonaHobbyHorse.London:Phaidon,1963.• Ernst Gombrich, Julian Hochberg and Max Black, Art Perception and Reality.

Baltimore:TheJohnHopkinsUniversityPress,1972.• Ernst Gombrich and Didier Eribon, Conversations on Art and Science. New York:

Abrams,1993.

• OnionsJ.(ed.).Sight&Insight.EssaysinHonourofE.H.Gombrich.(London:Phaidon1994).

• SheldonRichmond,Aesthetic Criteria:Gombrich and the Philosophies of Science ofPopperandPolanyi.AmsterdamandAtlanta,GA:Rodopi,1994.

• ChristopherWood, “E.H.Gombrich’sArt and Illusion:A Study in thePsychologyofPictorialRepresentation,1960”,TheBurlingtonMagazine,vol.151no.1281(2009),pp.836-839.

Lecture3–Thursday24JanuaryRepresentation,ClassificationandtheOrderofThingsRequiredReadings:MichelFoucault,TheOrderofThings(London:Routledge,2002).(Preface and extracts from part 1: 1. Las Meniñas; 2.1 “The Four Similitudes”; 3.Representing)Furtherreadings:

• Svetlana Alpers, “Interpretation without Representation, or the Viewing of LasMeniñas”,inRepresentations,vol.1(1983),pp.30-42.

• SvetlanaAlpers,TheArtofDescribing.Dutchartintheseventeenthcentury.(Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1983).

• SvetlanaAlpers,“TheStudio, theLaboratoryandtheVexationsofArt”, in Jones,C.and Galison. P. (eds.), Picturing Science and Producing Art. (London: Routledge

7

UniversityPress1998),401-417.• JohnSearle,“LasMeniñasandtheParadoxesofPictorialRepresentation”inCritical

Inquiryvol.6no.3(1980),pp.477-488.CompanionsandsecondarysourcesonFoucault:

• Gutting,GaryandOksala,Johanna,"MichelFoucault",TheStanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophy (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/foucault/>.

• JohannaOksala,HowtoReadFoucault,London:GrantaBooks2007.• Gary Gutting (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Foucault, Cambridge: Cambridge

UniversityPress,2009,2ndedition.• Gary Gutting, Michel Foucault’s Archaeology of Scientific Reason, Cambridge:

CambridgeUniversityPress,1989.Lecture4–Thursday31JanuaryTruth-to-Nature[Note:ThislecturewilltakeplaceintheUCLArtMuseum]RequiredReadings:LorraineDastonandPeterGalison,Objectivity.NewYork:ZoneBooks2007.(Chapter2,Truth-to-Nature)FurtherReadings:

• LorraineDaston,“ObjectivityandtheEscapefromPerspective”, inSocialStudiesofScience,vol.22,no.4(1992),pp.597-618.

• LorraineDastonandPeterGalison,“TheImageofObjectivity”,inRepresentations,no.40(1992),pp.81-128.

• LorraineDaston“OnScientificObservation”,inISIS,vol.99,no.1(2008),pp.97-110.• LorraineDastonandPeterGalison,“EpistemologiesoftheEye”, inObjectivity (New

York:ZoneBooks2007),pp.17-51.HistoricalCase-Studies

• Lorraine Daston and Elizabeth Lunbeck (eds.), Histories of Scientific Observation.Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2011. (see especially Part 1:“FramingtheHistoryofScientificObservation,500-1800)

• Peter Galison and Caroline Jones, Picturing Science, Producing Art. New York andLondon:Routledge,1998(seeespeciallyPart3,“SeeingWonders”).

• Reinhard Hildebrand, “Attic Perfection in Anatomy: Bernhard Siegfried Albinus(1697–1770)andSamuelThomasSoemmerring(1755–1830),in:AnnalsofAnatomy,

8

187,vols5-6(2005),pp.555-573.• AnnB.ShteirandBernardLightman(ed.)Figuringitout:Science,GenderandVisual

CultureDartmouthCollegePress,2006(seeespeciallypart1,chapters1-3).• PatrickSingy“Huber’sEyes:TheArtofScientificObservationbeforetheEmergence

ofPositivism”,inRepresentations,vol.95,no.1,pp.54-75.ThestoryofWandelaar’srhino:

• Chiara Ambrosio, “Objectivity and Representative Practices across Scientific andArtisticVisualisation”,inA.Carusietal.VisualisationintheAgeofComputerisation,London:Routledge2014,pp.118-144.

Lecture5–Thursday7FebruaryTheConundrumofRepresentationinPhilosophyofScienceRequiredreadings:RomanFriggandMatthewHunter(eds.)BeyondMimesisandConvention:RepresentationinArtandScience(Dordrecht:Springer,2010)(Introduction)Mauricio Suárez, “ScientificRepresentation”, PhilosophyCompass (2010) vol. 5, no. 1, pp.91-101.Furtherreadings:

• Ambrosio, C. “Iconic Representations and Representative Practices”, InternationalStudiesinPhilosophyofScience,vol.28(3),2014,pp.255-275

• OtavioBueno,GeorgeDarby,StevenFrenchandDeanRickles,ThinkingaboutScience,ReflectingonArt,London:Routledge,2018.

• Black, M. Models and Metaphors. Ithaca and New York: Cornell University Press,1966.

• Roman Frigg and Stephan Hartmann, S. 2006. “Models in Science”. The StanfordEncyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/models-science/.

• IanHacking,Representingand Intervening.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1983.

• MaryHesse,ModelsandAnalogiesinScience,NotreDame:IndianaUniversityPress,1966.

• DavidKaiser, “Stick-FigureRealism:Conventions,Reificationand thePersistenceofFeynmanDiagrams”,inRepresentations,no.70(2000),pp.49-86.

• Morgan,M.andMorrison,M.(eds.).ModelsasMediators.PerspectivesonNaturalandSocialScience.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1999.

• DemetrisPortides,“ScientificRepresentation,DenotationandExplanatoryPower”,in:Raftopoulos, A. andMachamer, P. (eds), Perception, Realism and the Problem ofReference.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2012.

• MauricioSuárez,“ScientificRepresentation:AgainstSimilarityandIsomorphism”in:

9

InternationalStudiesinthePhilosophyofScience(2003),vol.17no.3:225-244.• Julia Sánchez-Dorado “Methodological Lessons for the integrationof Philosophyof

ScienceandAesthetics”,inO.Buenoetal.ThinkingaboutScience,ReflectingonArt,London:Routledge,2018,pp.10-26.

• BasvanFraassen,ScientificRepresentation:ParadoxesofPerspective(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2008.

Thursday14February–READINGWEEK,nolectures/seminarsPart2–Representations“inAction”Lecture6–Thursday21FebruaryRepresentationintheAgeofMechanicalReproduction[Note:Thisweek’stutorialwilltakeplaceintheUCLArtMuseum]Requiredreadings:LorraineDastonandPeterGalison,Objectivity(NewYork:ZoneBooks,2007)(Chapter3,MechanicalObjectivity)FurtherReadings:

• Chiara Ambrosio, “Composite Photographs and the Quest for Generality: ThemesfromPeirceandGalton”,CriticalInquiryvol.42no3(2016),pp.547-579.

• ChiaraAmbrosio,“’BeautyistheUniversalSeen’:ObjectivityasTrainVisioninAlfredStieglitz’sExperimentalAesthetics”,VisualStudiesvol.29no.3,pp.250-260.

• Walter Benjamin, Illuminations. London: Pimlico, 1999. (this collection of essayscontains“TheWorkofArtintheAgeofMechanicalReproduction”).

• WalterBenjamin,TheWorkofArt in theAgeofMechanicalReproduction.London:PenguinBooks,2008.

• Peter Geimer, “Image as Trace: Speculation about an Undead Paradigm”, indifferences,vol.18,no.1,pp.7-28.

• CarloGinzburg,“FamilyResemblancesandFamilyTrees:TwoCognitiveMetaphors”,inCriticalInquiry,vol.30no.3(2004),pp.537-556.

• Andreas Mayer, “The Physiological Circus: Knowing, Representing and TrainingHorsesinMotioninNineteenthCenturyFrance”,inRepresentations,vol.111,no.1(2010),pp88-120.

• Francis Ribemont, Patrick Daum and Philip Prodger (eds.), Impressionist Camera:PictorialistPhotographyinEurope,1888-1918(London:Merrell,2006)

• SusanSontag,OnPhotography(London:PenguinClassics2008)• Joel Snyder, “Visualisation and Visualizability”, in Peter Galison and Caroline Jones

(eds.),PicturingScience,ProducingArt(NewYorkandLondon:Routledge,1998)

10

Lecture7–Thursday28FebruaryModernistVisionsRequiredreadings:Chooseoneofthefollowing(youcanusetheremainingarticleasoptionalreading):LindaDalrympleHenderson,“X-RaysandtheQuestforInvisibleRealityintheArtofKupka,DuchampandtheCubists”,in:ArtJournalvol.47(1988)pp.323-340.PeterGalison,“Aufbau/Bauhaus:LogicalPositivismandArchitecturalModernism”inCriticalInquiry,Vol.16,no.4(1990),pp.709-752.Furtherreadings:

• Chiara Ambrosio, “Cubism and the Fourth Dimension”, in Interdisciplinary ScienceReviews,vol.41,no2-3,pp.202-221.

• Willard Bohn “In Pursuit of the Fourth Dimension: Guillaume Apollinaire andMaxWeber”in:Artsvol.54(1980),pp.166-169.

• LindaDalrympleHenderson,TheFourthDimensionandNon-EuclideanGeometry inModernArt,Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,1983).Seealsothesecondedition,MITPress2013.

• Linda Dalrymple Henderson, “Editor’s Introduction – Writing Modern Art andScience”, inScienceinContext,vol.17no.4(2004),pp.423-466. (youcanusethisissueofScienceinContextasasourceoffurthermaterialonModernismandScience)

• LindaDalrympleHenderson,FromEnergyto Information:Representation inScienceandTechnology,Art,andLiterature.Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress,2002.

• William R. Everdell, The First Moderns: Profiles and Origins of Twentieth CenturyThought.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1999.

• GeraldHolton,“HenriPoincaré,MarcelDuchampandInnovationinScienceandArt”,inLeonardo,vol34no.2(2001),pp.127-134.

• StephenKern,TheCultureofTimeandSpace1880-1918,Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress,1983.

• ArthurI.Miller,InsightsofGenius.Cambridge,Mass.:TheMITPress,2000.• ArthurI.Miller,Einstein,Picasso.Space,TimeandtheBeautythatCausesHavoc.New

York:BasicBooks,2001.• GavinParkinsonSurrealism,ArtandModernScience.Relativity,QuantumMechanics,

Epistemology.NewHavenandLondon:YaleUniversityPress,2008.

11

Lecture8–Thursday7MarchRepresentingTime:SerialityandDuration[Note:Thisweek’stutorialwilltakeplaceintheUCLArtMuseum]RequiredReadings:JimenaCanales“DesiredMachines:CinemaandtheWorldinItsOwnImage”,inScienceinContext,no.24vol.3(2011),pp.329-359.Furtherreadings:

• Keith Ansell Pearson and John Mullarkey (eds.) Bergson: Key Writings. London:Continuum,2002.

• Henri Bergson, Duration and Simultaneity, edited by Robin Durie. Manchester:ClinamenPress,1999.

• SuzanneGuerlac,ThinkinginTime;AnIntroductiontoHenriBergson.Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress,2006.

• JimenaCanales,ThePhysicistandThePhilosopher.PrincetonandOxford:PrincetonUniversityPress.

• JimenaCanalesATenthofaSecond:AHistory(ChicagoandLondon:TheUniversityofChicagoPress,2009)

• StephenKern,TheCultureofTimeandSpace1880-1914,Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress.(Seeespeciallychapters1-4andchapter11)

• MarkAntliff“TheFourthDimensionandFuturism:APoliticisedSpace”,inArtBulletin,vol82no.4(2000),pp.720-733.

Lecture9–Thursday14MarchVisualizationLostandRegainedRequiredReadings:PeterGalison,“TheSuppressedDrawing:PaulDirac’sHiddenGeometry”,inRepresentations,no.72(2000),pp.145-166.FurtherReadings:

• Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison, “Trained Judgment”, inObjectivity, New York:ZoneBooks2007,pp.309-357.

• PeterGalison,ImageandLogic.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1997.• DavidKaiser,DrawingTheoriesApart,Chicago:TheUniversityofChicagoPress,2005.• ArthurI.Miller,InsightsofGeniusCambridge,Mass.:TheMITPress(2nded.).• Arthur I. Miller “Aesthetics, Representation and Creativity in Art and Science” in

Leonardo,vol.28no.3(1995),pp.185-192.• AndrewPickering,TheMangleofPractice,Chicago:TheUniversityofChicagoPress,

12

1995.• Warwick,Andrew,MastersofTheory.Chicago:TheUniversityofChicagoPress,2003.

Lecture10–Thursday21MarchTheFutureofRepresentations[Note:Thisweek’slecturewilltakeplaceintheUCLArtMuseum]RequiredReadings:LorraineDastonandPeterGalison,Objectivity,NewYork:ZoneBooks2007,Chapter7(RepresentationtoPresentation)FurtherReadings:

• --TraditionAside.SladePrintmakersofthe1960s.London:UCLArtCollections,2007• Carusi, A.S. Hoel, T.Webmoor and S. Woolgar (eds.), Visualisation in the Age of

Computerisation(London:Routledge2014).• HaroldCohen,“ASelf-DefiningGameforOnePlayer:OntheNatureofCreativityand

thePossibilityofCreativeComputerPrograms”,inLeonardo,vol.35no.1(2002),pp.59-64.

• Coopmans, J. Vertesi, M. Lynch, S. Woolgar, Representation in Scientific PracticeRevisited.Cambridge,Mass.TheMITPress,2014.

• M.LynchandS.WoolgarRepresentationinScientificPractice.Cambridge,Mass.:TheMITPress,1990.

• R. Hamblyn and M. J. Callanan, The Data Soliloquies. London: UCL EnvironmentInstitute,2009.

• Andrew Pickering, The Cybernetic Brain, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,2009.

• ChristianePaul(ed.).ACompaniontoDigitalArt.Oxford:Wiley,2016.• Rainer Usselmann, “The Dilemma ofMedia Art: Cybernetic Serendipity at the ICA

London”,inLeonardo,vol.36,no.5(2003),pp.389-396.