Informed aesthetic consensus and the creation of urban environments

Main Article Content

Johannes Mueller-Salo

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze the aesthetics of urban environments. One central feature of urban environments is that they are surroundings that we share with each other and hence their aesthetic outlook belongs to our common world. One may then ask how common, i.e. shared surroundings should be planned, designed and managed? The author claims that an informed aesthetic consensus is needed. Throughout the paper he discusses why it is important to think about a consensus within urban aesthetic decision making in postmodern times, he presents the notion of an informed aesthetic consensus and its importance for aesthetic theory, finally—he explains how it may be applied to democratic processes of urban aesthetic decision making.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Mueller-Salo, J. (2019). Informed aesthetic consensus and the creation of urban environments. Polish Journal of Landscape Studies, 1(2-3), 117-132. https://doi.org/10.14746/pls.2018.2.3.9
Section
Articles

References

  1. Arendt, Hannah. 1989. The Human Condition. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  2. Aristotle. 1976. Metaphysics, Books M and N. Translated and edited by Julia Annas. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  3. Beardsley, Monroe C. 1958. Aesthetics: Problems in the Philosophy of Criticism. New York: Harcourt.
  4. Beauchamp, Tom L. and James F. Childress. 2013. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  5. Berleant, Arnold. 1992. The Aesthetics of Environment. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
  6. Berleant, Arnold. 1997. Living in the Landscape: Toward an Aesthetics of Environment. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
  7. Berleant, Arnold and Allen Carlson. 2007. The Aesthetics of Human Environments. Peterborough: Broadview
  8. Press.
  9. Bonsdorff, Pauline von. 1998. The Human Habitat: Aesthetic and Axiological Perspectives. Lahti: International
  10. Institute of Applied Aesthetics.
  11. Carlson, Allen. 2000. Aesthetics and the Environment. The Appreciation of Nature, Art and Architecture. New York: Routledge.
  12. Carlson, Allen. 2001. “On Aesthetically Appreciating Human Environments.” Philosophy and Geography 4: 9—24.
  13. Carlson, Allen. 2002. Aesthetics and the Environment: The Appreciation of Nature, Art and Architecture. London: Routledge.
  14. Carlson, Allen. 2014. “Ten Steps in the Development of Western Environmental Aesthetics.” In Environmental Aesthetics: Crossing Divides and Breaking Ground, edited by Martin Drenthen and Jozef Keulartz, 13—24. New York: Fordham University Press.
  15. Fishkin, James S. 2014. “Deliberative Democracy in Context: Reflections on Theory and Practice.” In Deliberative Mini-Publics: Involving Citizens in the Democratic Process, edited by André Bächtiger, Kimmo Grönlund, and Maija Setälä, 27—39. Colchester: ECPR.
  16. Goodin, Robert E. 2008. Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice after the Deliberative Turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  17. Haapala, Arto. 1998. The City as Cultural Metaphor. Lahti: International Institute of Applied Aesthetics.
  18. Haapala, Arto. 2005. “On the Aesthetics of the Everyday: Familiarity, Strangeness, and the Meaning of Place.” In The Aesthetics of Everyday Life, edited by Andrew Light and Jonathan M. Smith, 39—5. New York: Columbia University Press.
  19. Habermas, Jürgen. 1997. Between Facts and Norms. Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Translated by William Rehg. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  20. Innes, Judith. 1995. “Planning Theory’s Emerging Paradigm: Communicative Action and Interactive Practice.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 14: 183—9.
  21. Lehtinen, Sanna. 2015. Excursions into Everyday Spaces: Mapping Aesthetic Potentiality of Urban Environments through Preaesthetic Sensitivities. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
  22. Lehtinen, Sanna. 2017. “Future Definitions of Everyday Environments.” In Proceedings of the 20th International Congress of Aesthetics (Seoul, July 24—29, 2016), 645—9. Seoul: The Korean Society for Aesthetics.
  23. Macdonald, Elizabeth. 2012. “Beauty.” In The Oxford Handbook of Urban Planning, edited by Rachel Weber and Randall Crane, 105—19. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  24. Mattila, Hanna. 2016. “Can Collaborative Planning Go Beyond Locally Focused Notions of the “Public Interest”? The Potential of Habermas’ Concept of “Generalizable Interest” in Pluralist and Trans-Scalar Planning Discourses.” Planning Theory 15 (4): 344—65.
  25. Müller-Salo, Johannes. 2016. “Eine Theorie naturästhetischer Wertung.” Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 70: 237—56.
  26. Rawls, John. 1972. A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  27. Rawls, John. 2005. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
  28. Sager, Tore. 2012. “Collective Action: Balancing Public and Particular Interests.” In The Oxford Handbook of Urban Planning, edited by Rachel Weber and Randall Crane. 25—45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  29. Saito, Yuriko. 2007. Everyday Aesthetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  30. Sepänmaa, Yrjö. 1986. The Beauty of Environment: A General Mode for Environmental Aesthetics. Helsinki:
  31. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.