Luana Poliseli Ramos

June 23 - August 08, 2025

Affiliation: Research Assistant | Department of Philosophy | Faculty of Humanities | School of Social Sciences | The University of Manchester 

luana.poliseli@manchester.ac.uk 

Research for a study about:

Beauty and the Beast: The Epistemic Functions of Aesthetics in Science Beyond Theory Choice

Abstract 

1. Objective
This project tackles the diversity of aesthetic values in science. By drawing lessons from the history and philosophy of science while engaging with contemporary debates on the aesthetics of science, I will explore the plurality of epistemic functions of aesthetics in science beyond questions of beauty and theory choice.

2. Research Outline
In the history of philosophy of science, the aesthetic dimensions of scientific knowledge were often relegated to the psychological or subjective aspects of science, being linked to events of eureka, a-ha, beauty, among others (Ivanova 2020). Even though beauty in theory choice was already discussed in Kuhn’s (1973) and Duhem’s (1954) works, only later discussions about the role of scientific representation of models recognized the epistemic potential of aesthetic values (see van Frassen 2008; French 2003; Frigg, 2010).
Aesthetics is traditionally associated with the appreciation of beauty. In science, beauty is largely related to the success of a theory or an experiment (McAllister 1996; Ivanova & Murphy 2023). Tailoring to scientific experiments, scientists can experience beauty and have aesthetic appreciation concerning the object of study (e.g. when the phenomenon under investigation is visually pleasant); the instruments and tools adopted (e.g. when they can possess an aesthetic pleasing appearance due to skilled craftsmanship); the experimental design (e.g. when the elegance, the economical and simple set up of an experiment can relate to its suitability for a particular goal); the process of conceptualizing, constructing, and running the experiment (e.g. when scientists use creativity, imagination and aesthetic sensibility in several stages of experimentation, from design to implementation); the performance of the experiment (e.g. when it can reveal beautiful phenomenon producing a sense of wonder and awe, it can generate a feeling of connectedness to others, etc.); and the significance of the result (e.g. when different outcomes can generate different aesthetic responses such as understanding, frustration, surprise or others) (Ivanova 2021, 2023).

Nevertheless, aesthetics of science does not apply only to experimentation. Aesthetic values are widespread in science, and are part of the objects of study (e.g. cells, numbers, etc.); the products of science (e.g. theories, models, technology, etc.); the scientific practice (e.g. constructing theories, designing experiments, testing hypothesis, etc.) (Arcangeli & Dokic 2020); research teams collaboration (e.g. inter- and transdisciplinary research); and science communication (e.g. SciArt, DataVisualization, paleoart, etc.). Therefore, beauty, as an aesthetic value of science, can relate to distinct aesthetic appreciations going beyond its literal sense. McAllister (1996) first called attention to the wide spectrum in which beauty is associated, such as symmetry, systematicity, simplicity, elegance, and so on. However, aesthetic responses in science are rendered not only through positive aesthetic experiences but also through negative ones (see Poliseli 2024). In this sense, other aesthetic responses such as displeasure, disinterestedness, denials, and many others can also reflect aesthetic values in science. If a property of an object evokes any of these or other responses in an observer during scientific practice, it can be considered aesthetic (McAllister 1996).

Thus, for the sake of this project, I consider aesthetic properties, aesthetic responses, aesthetic judgments, aesthetic sensibility, and similar, as part of an ‘aesthetic practice’. I refer to ‘aesthetic practice’ as the plurality of associations and discussions concerning aesthetics, such as aesthetic engagement, instances, attitudes, responses, appreciations, judgments, values, preferences, attunements, interpretations, culture, and so on. I do not wish to discuss singularities and distinctions between them as I consider aesthetic practices to be distinguished through dynamic relations rather than object properties and attitudes alone (Brincker 2015). However, I do endorse the general rationale underneath which aesthetic responses serve as the basis for an aesthetic judgment, which in turn, helps assign a value to what is observed or experienced (Brady 2003). Due to such, they work as gatekeepers of science (Elgin 2020), and can offer different epistemic advantages such as empirical adequacy, heuristic role in (under)determination of a theory, relations to truth, scientific understanding, and so on (Ivanova 2017; Stuart 2018; Breitenbach 2019; Ivanova, French 2020).

Despite such diversity, debates on the aesthetics of science have traditionally associated the appreciation of beauty with the success of a theory or an experiment (McAllister 1996; Ivanova & Murphy 2023). I argue that such a narrow focus is an oversimplification and does not represent the complexity of aesthetic values and experiences used in contemporary science to explain and understand the world. Thus, this project aims to answer the following questions: what are the epistemic functions of aesthetics in science beyond questions of beauty and theory choice? What does an account of “aesthetic practices” in science entail, and is there a definition of aesthetic experiences that can embrace the plurality of practices?
The results of this project will help philosophy of science to better understand scientific practices overall the unorthodox methods underlying scientific decisions. Additionally, it will foster debates in the aesthetics of science beyond theory choice allowing philosophers to rethink the heuristic role of aesthetics in science as to help improve scientists' epistemic toolbox.

Lecture

Beauty and the Beast: The Epistemic Functions of Aesthetics in Science Beyond Theory Choice

Philosophy of Science Colloquium 

Date: July 03, 2025

Time: 4.45 pm -6.15 pm CET

Venue for all talks: Lecture Hall 3A, NIG Universitätsstraße 7, 3rd floor, NIG/ Neues Institutsgebäude, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010 Vienna

Abstract:
In the history of philosophy of science, the aesthetic dimensions of scientific knowledge were often relegated to the psychological or subjective aspects of science, being linked to events of eureka, a-ha, beauty, among others (Ivanova 2020). Even though beauty in theory choice was already discussed in Kuhn's (1973) and Duhem's (1954) works, only later discussions about the role of scientific representation of models recognized the epistemic potential of aesthetic values (see van Frassen 2008; French 2003; Frigg, 2010). Aesthetics is traditionally associated with the appreciation of beauty. In science, beauty is traditionally and largely related to the success of a theory or an experiment (McAllister 1996). However, recent debates on the aesthetics of science have indicated that the scientists' aesthetics arsenal is far more diverse and epistemically advantageous than traditionally conceived (see Ivanova & French 2020; Ivanova & Murphy 2023). I undertake these debates to argue against the traditional oversimplification as it does not represent the complexity of aesthetic values and experiences used in contemporary science to explain and understand the world. By expanding the philosophical account of aesthetics in science, this project challenges reductive views of science as purely logical or objective. It emphasizes that scientific knowledge is not only shaped by empirical and theoretical considerations but also by the sensuous, affective, and interpretive dimensions of aesthetic experiences. Ultimately, by unboxing unorthodox methods underlying scientific decisions, I reposition aesthetics as central to reflections of scientific practice and knowledge production, enabling philosophers to reconceptualize the epistemic functions of aesthetics as a means of enriching scientific resources.