Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(5)
Sparshott (1995) disagrees with the idea that dance criticism is valuable for understanding dance and he appears to be the sole dance philosopher who holds this view.
McFee holds that causal accounts, particularly from the sciences, of the appreciation and experience of dance, either in terms of kinesthetic responses or anything else, are never relevant to understanding dance as art.
The use of the body in dance is one of the things that distinguishes it from other art forms, but to what extent does this difference make a difference in understanding dance as a form of art?
This view may have some merit (indeed, the same can be said of philosophy of dance), but Sparshott goes so far as to say that criticism is entirely worthless for understanding dance; that it "is not a discipline" and as such does not mark any distinctive area for dance understanding (1995, 338).
Carroll and Seeley (2013) argue, for example, that one of the central features of understanding dance is to understand the nature of the experience of dance in all its aspects, cognitive as well as kinesthetic and felt.
Similar(55)
All of this stuff was a part of me really understanding modern dance.
She's really instinctive in understanding that dance music comes from a very minimal way of working.
For example, understanding the dances of cells, molecules, and atoms allows us to make strides developing important technologies in areas like medicine and mobile communications; however, the same understanding also provides detailed insight into the dramatic impact that our modern lifestyles has on the planet and its atmosphere.
Understanding this cellular dance is, as Tsiaras notes, beyond current mathematical comprehension, and can only be appreciated through the lenses of mystery, magic, and even divinity.
We still seem to be a long way from fully understanding the intricate dance between NF-kB and p53.
It contradicts their understanding of dance.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com