The claim that having aesthetic properties supervenes on having non-aesthetic properties has been widely discussed and, in various ways, defended. In this article, I aim to demonstrate that even if it is sometimes true that a supervenience relation holds between aesthetic properties and ‘subvenient’ non-aesthetic ones, it is not the interesting relation in the neighbourhood. As we shall see, a richer, asymmetric, and irreflexive relation is required, and I shall defend the claim that the increasingly popular relation of grounding does amuch better job than supervenience.
How to Cite:
Benovsky, Jiri. “Aesthetic Supervenience Versus Aesthetic Grounding”. Estetika: The Central European Journal of Aesthetics 49, no. 2 (2012): 166–78. DOI: http://doi.org/10.33134/eeja.96