The two-culture problem (which one might think Leonardo had solved) is particularly vexing when it comes to neuroscience and visual art. Neuroaestheticians would have us believe that they can—at least in principle—help us understand art by telling us how the brain of the creative artist produces art and how the brain of the viewer processes art and produces pleasure. I will take a skeptical look at such claims, share some thoughts about conditions that would make such a rapprochement possible, and illustrate with a puzzle concerning Leonardo's Last Supper.
This conversation was part of The Soul of Leonardo da Vinci: A symposium in celebration of the quincentenary of Leonardo’s death
, with Hanna Arie-Gaifman, Jonathan Berger, Howard Morgan, Michael Kubovy, Israel Nelken, Barbara Tversky, Timothy Weaver, and Robert Zwijnenberg.
Co-Produced by the 92nd Street Y and Stanford University’s Symposium on Music and the Brain.
92Y needs your help
Many of you have asked how you can help 92Y as we face tremendous financial losses due to Covid-19. From now through June 30, your gift will be matched dollar for dollar up to $250,000 by an anonymous donor—going twice as far in supporting 92Y. You can help sustain our beloved institution and support the creation of new, online programming that will bring comfort and inspiration to our community. Thank you for anything you can do to help.