[Fis] Art and the Cognitive (Is art a human phenomenon?)

[Marcus Abundis]

Hi László,

>From your introductory post, and the longer paper's abstract it is not
clear what we are being asked to consider in your talk. I thought the
'whole matter' of art, etc. was a wholly settled matter, often framed as
the 'Upper Paleolithic Revolution' (but at times called various names). The
advent of cave paintings, etc. was seen as clear evidence for a human
capacity for abstraction and abstract thought, first arising somewhere
between 300KYA (first modern humans) and 50KYA (early evident artifacts).

What exactly are we considering in your talk?

Thank you,

Marcus Abundis
55mrcs at gmail.com (best)
+41 62 844 2193 home (2nd best)
+41 77 465 8977 (cell)


On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 9:35 PM Csáji László Koppány <csaji.koppany at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear FIS Colleagues,
>
> This is rather a starting point of a conversation than a report of
> research results; a call to think together and share our thoughts and
> knowledge. The question in this kick-off text is very simple: Is art a
> human ability? As a social and cultural anthropologist, I conducted
> fieldworks in Asia, Africa, and Europe over the last few decades. Art
> penetrates our everyday life and rituals; just think of the built
> environment, music, design, literature, fine arts, vernacular arts, etc. I
> have recently published a paper that addresses art(s), aiming to develop a
> new definition from the perspective of cognitive sciences (see: Toward a
> Multidimensional Definition of Art from the Perspective of Cognitive
> Sciences | MDPI
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.mdpi.com/3042-8084/2/1/1__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Xrv66q4RXEKv2pWONoI8np-mus_kNGSc3EjXMgbnMskwKkNrkjmE_CkucMR_l-mR9kB5LSEAvPHhwXtKfFcx6TrO8g$>).
> My attached kick-off text largely relies on this long paper.
>
> Numerous attempts to define art have been made from antiquity to the
> present, yet historical overviews often adopt a Eurocentric (and
> American-centric) perspective focused mainly on culturally dependent
> aesthetic approaches. As a universal social and cultural phenomenon, art
> resists center-periphery models. Art is not merely a unique representation
> of reality, but also an ability to create new realities and thereby shape
> society. Art has attracted and accompanied people from the dawn of history.
> Some argue that acquiring the ability to create and appreciate art was one
> of the few important steps in the process of becoming Homo Sapiens. Thus,
> it is a universal phenomenon that spans ages and cultures—arising from
> something fundamentally human.  However, is it really fundamentally human?
> What gives its "merely" human factor? Do our experiences (image) on AI
> development and its social functions support this idea? Ethologists,
> cognitive scientists, and psychologists often over-emphasize one element
> (e.g., visual symmetry-asymmetry, harmony, beauty, etc.) of art(s) that
> seems suitable for their research methods. This seems a pragmatic and
> reasonable solution, but it easily obscures the “big picture” and the core
> of the problem. Thus, it remains a question how art can be considered as a
> human activity. Consequently, artists and scholars have been preoccupied
> since ancient times with the question of what art is, or how certain
> prominent forms of art (visual arts, drama, music, literature, etc.) work.
> Nevertheless, the abstract concept of art is not expressed by a notion
> (word) in every culture. There are significant differences in the use of
> the words linked to art. Moreover, the meaning of art has changed
> continuously and significantly over time, albeit at different rates.
>
> The cognitive turn reshaped art theory by reconsidering art as a cognitive
> dimension of humanity. Art has no limits on who can create or enjoy it. The
> ability to use and understand metaphor, for instance, demonstrates everyday
> human artistic cognition. I introduced a simple vectorial model that aligns
> closely with the idea of family resemblance in the sense that cognitive
> semantics conceives it as a kind of categorization (meaning construction). This
> a 3D model rather than a simple definition. Since art lacks a single,
> definitive prototype, no strict, universal definition can capture all its
> forms in a yes or no spectrum. My filed studies showed me the variability
> of artistic practices (in craft, value, range of affect, etc.) that can be
> placed in different ways within a space (and not a category) of art. In
> this model, three coordinates form a space. These vectors (coordinates) are
> equally relevant cognitive aspects: 1. Creativity, 2. Communication, 3.
> Experience. For further, detailed argumentation see the attached file.
>
> Dear FIS members, dear colleagues in different scientific disciplines! Do
> you agree or disagree that art is a human ability? If yes or no: what kind
> of evidence can we set up for the argumentation?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>                             László Koppány Csáji
>
>
> P.s. See the attached file for further details and argumentation
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis 
> ----------
> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por
> la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el
> siguiente enlace:
> https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas 
> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
> http://listas.unizar.es 
> ----------
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20260110/714d4a25/attachment.html>