merging perspectives of learners corporeality intersubjectivity and coexistence in art education

Anales de Antropologíawww.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/antropologia Anales de Antropología xxx 2016 xxx–xxx Note Merging perspectives of learners: Corporeality, intersubjectivity and coexi

Anales de Antropología

www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/antropologia Anales de Antropología xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

Note

Merging perspectives of learners: Corporeality, intersubjectivity

and coexistence in art education 夽

Fusionar perspectivas de los estudiantes: corporealidad, intersubjetividad y convivencia

en la educación artística

Alireza Sayyada, Nahid Gilamirrodb,∗, Amirhosein Sayyadb

aArt University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

bAzad University of Rasht, Rasht, Iran

Received 4 September 2016; accepted 11 November 2016

Introduction

Humiliationofbodyandfeelingsisdeeplyrootedinthe

philo-sophicaltraditionoftheWest.InWesternhistoryofphilosophy,

thebodyhasalwaysbeenundersuspicionandtherationalpower

hasbeenconsideredasholdingtheresponsibilityofrestraining

andguidingone towardexcellence From the Ancient Greek

philosopherssuchasSocratesandPlatotomodernphilosophers

suchasDescartes,itwasconstantlystatedinthistraditionthat

realknowledgemustbeindependentfromphysicalperception

andfeelings,becausesensualandemotionalexperiencesdistort

thenatureofreality.TheviewinCartesianphilosophybecame

an absoluteand established form andleft aprofound impact

onmodernview onthe priority of wisdom.Formodern

per-ception,also,thebodyusedtobeconsideredanunreliableand

uncertainbasisfor recognition.Theidea of thinkingin

mod-ernphilosophyiscoupledwithDescartes’well-knownquote,“I

think,thereforeIam”.Descartesstatedthattoachievethetruth,

bodilysensesarenotessentiallyrequired,andthus,heseparated

mindandbodyanddividedthemintotwoindependentand

dis-tinctelements.Descartesbelievedthathumanmindandwisdom

arepriortophysicalfeelingsanddesires,andtheonlywayto

achieverecognitionandtruthistorelyonmindwithoutbody,

becausebodyandphysicalsensesmightmisguidetheseekerin

thewayofrecognition

Westerndualisminrelationwithmind/bodyled tothe

for-mationofahierarchicalsysteminwhichthebodywasplacedin

∗Correspondingauthor.

E-mail address:nahid.gilamirrod@yahoo.com (N Gilamirrod).

夽 PeerreviewundertheresponsibilityofUniversidadNacionalAutónomade

México.

apositionlowerthanthemind.Affectedbythedominationof thisview,Westerneducationphilosophycanalsobeconsidered

asthephilosophyofmindtraining.Emphasisonrecognitionvia mindandthinkingdeniedthecontinuityofmind,body,andsense

intheprocessof learning.Therefore,focusonnon-embodied educationdominatedthewesterneducationaldiscourse,andas John Dewey states, education became far from its goal and turned into a way for turning the learner into a “thoughtful and knowledge-oriented creature”(Dewey, 2004:256) Aban-doningrationalandCartesian views,whichimpliedcognitive andwisdom-basedapproaches,inrecentyearsatrendemerged frommindtobody(LaCaze&Lloyd,2011).Thistrendisin contrasttoPlatonicandCartesianviewsandseekstofinda non-dualisticviewontheconceptofself.Thisturntowardbodyin connectionwitheducationseemsverynecessary,andattention

toembodimentintheworksofsomecontemporaryeducation theoristshasfoundaboldposition

Literature review

Amongtheoristswhoemphasizedtheimportance of body-orientededucation,JohnDewey,Henry Giroux,Hunter,Peter McLaren,andElizabethGroszcanbementioned.Affectedby theschoolofpragmatism,JohnDewey(2004)believedthatin the process of learning,the learner perceives based on their livedexperiences.Heassumededucationasasetofexperiences wherethelearnerthereforeacquiresanembodiedpresencein theeducationalenvironment.PeterMcLarenandHenryGiroux (1991)suggestinthearticleRadical Pedagogy as Cultural

thatstudentsrespondtoinformationinaphysicalway, assert-ingthatknowledgeisnotsomethingthatcanonlybeperceived

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.antro.2016.11.001

0185-1225/© 2016 Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ).

Hunterchallengesabsenceandignoranceofbodyandfeelingsin

education,suggestingthatineducationapproaches,embodiment

andsensualaspectsofpupilsshouldalsobeconsidered(Ollis,

2012:174).InVolatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism,

ElizabethGroszarguesthatbodiesarenotwhatwegive

mean-ingto,buttheyaremeaningsperse.Understandingthebodyas

meaning,incontrasttobodyasawrapperandconveyorweplace

andrecordmeaningin, physicalembodiment-basededucation

emphasizesaneducationonthebasisofbodies’sinteractionwith

eachother

Physical perception according to Maurice

Merleau-Ponty

MauriceMerleau-Ponty,Frenchphenomenologist,isknown

asoneofthebasicfociincontemporarydiscourseson

embodi-ment,whotriedtoconfiguretherelationshipbetweenindividual

and the world by considering perceptive experience as a

basic source of awareness and perception (Diprose, 2012)

Merleau-Ponty, by challenging the dominant Cartesian view

ofsubjectivityandbydisintegrationfromthemind/body

dual-ismofWesternphilosophy,stressestheimportanceofbodyin

humanencounterswitheachotherandwiththeworld

Merleau-Ponty’sphilosophybasedideaisthat“Perceptionisaphysical

phenomenon,rather thanmental In otherwords,we are,not

subjects standing with eyes, but rather embodied subjects in

theworldperceivingit.”(Carman,2011:48–49).For

Merleau-Ponty,bodyis the baseandprimaryprinciple through which

thesubjectexpressesthemselves.Hearguesthatbodyisnota

merelydistinctandseparateobject;itisnotamaterialposition

through which we understand the world; rather, we perceive

the world withour bodies Effects of the ideasof Nietzsche

andHusserlonMerleau-Pontyregardingphysicalperceptions

cannotbeignored.CriticizingtheWesternphilosophical

tradi-tionindenyingbodilysensesandpurerationalism,Nietzsche

confirmedbodilyaspectsofknowledgeandperception.Among

Nietzsche’sfavoritediscourseswasattentiontophysical

indi-vidualexperiences,andheusedtoemphasizetheimportantrole

bodyplaysindevelopmentofknowledge.Nietzscheconsidered

perception of energy andpowers of humanbody as constant

humanconcernandbelievedthatallhumanactivitiesare

phys-icaland bodydenotes energy andtendency topower (Peery,

2008).Praisingpre-PlatoGreektradition,whichvaluedhuman

bodygreatly,heridiculedthePlatonicbody-humiliating

tradi-tion,statingcitingZoroasterassaying,“But,theconsciouswise

mansays:Iam allbodyandnothingbeyond,andsoulisthe

onlywordforsomethinginbody .bodyisabigwisdom;a

pluralitywithasinglemeaning,adversaryandpeaceful,cattle

orshepherd.Brother,yourlittlewisdomsoulofwhichyoucall

isyourbodyinstrumentaswell.Asmalltoolandplaythingfor

yourbigwisdom”(Nietzsche,2001:45–57).Bydistinguishing

betweenphysicalbodykorperandlivedbodyleib,heenabled

thebodytobeviewedmuchbeyondaphysicalandnatural

phe-nomenon.InfluenceofHusserl’sphilosophyonMerleau-Ponty’s

perceptionoftheconceptofbodyisquiteclear,andinspiredby

Husserl’sideaoflivedbodyandmovingbodyleib,heexpands

hisideology.InStructure of BehavioraffectedbyGestalt’s psy-chology,Merleau-Pontypropoundedthisideaforthefirsttime thatmanisanembodiedsubject(Premuzic,2009:10–12).Inline withthetheoryofGestalt’sschool,Merleau-Pontybelievesin unityandintegrationbetweenhumansenses,inwhicheyesight andothersensesarenotseparateandirrelevantandtherefore, perceptiondoesnotconsistofasetofdataacquiredfromsight, tactility, hearing,etc., but it is a set the individual perceives

asawhole.Experiencefromtheworld,accordingto Merleau-Ponty, is multisensory, with all senses interacting as a bow:

“The quintuple senseswhichare ourfirst meansof accessto theworld,arenotseparatefromoneanother.Rather,theyform

astructureorganizedinageneralgestalt.Bodyisultimately,a bodily whole”(PiraviVanak,2010:70).Merleau-Pontyshows thatavoidingtoconfirmintegrationofsensesandphysical real-ityofperceptioninphilosophicaltradition,hasovershadowed the roleof bodyinWesterncivilization,reducing ittoa situ-ationlowerthanmind.He believesthatbodyandmindinthe realityoflivedworldareinseparableandexistentially,no accu-rate boundarycanbespecifiedbetweenmindandbody:“Our bodies andmindsare locatedinaunited world,on condition that weconsidertheworldnotjustasetofobjectswhichare

or canbe infront of our eyes, buta placeof coexistence of everything”(Premuzic,2009:80).InPhenomenology of

andactivity, butit isthe embodiedpersonwhoachieves per-ception by seeing,moving, and putting their bodysubject to contact with objects Embodiment and incarnation is a state through whichthesubject expressesthemselvesintheworld;

a situation for development of the relationship between self and other things Thus, Merleau-Pontysuggests that body is not onlya residence placefor mind, butit is centerof grav-ityofhumanpresenceintheworld(Merleau-Ponty,1962:80) According toMerleau-Ponty, instead ofapassive capacityin thefaceofreceivedeffects,perceptionisacreativeandactive practiceandcreativityofperceptionisatypeofactivitywhich

isneverseparatefromphysics.Asideaandawarenessisno rec-ognizablefromperception,perceptionisalsoinseparablefrom the body and“Thetheory of the body isalready atheory of perception.” (Merleau-Ponty,1962:181).Therefore,according

to Merleau-Ponty, perception“isnot active practice of mind, but is existential method of an embodied subject in the pre-consciousstage.Itisadialogbetweentheembodiedsubjectand his/herworl”(PiraviVanak,2010:101).Seeingperceptionasan essentiallyphysicalpractice,insteadofconsideringitasa prac-tical result of unembodied thinking,Merleau-Ponty confirms physicsasnecessarypre-requisiteforexperimentandacquiring knowledge

Merleau-Pontysuggeststhat we arenot justabodyinthe world’s space, buta body of the world Therefore, existence

ofbodyispre-requisitetoallourexperiences(Merleau-Ponty,

1962:162) He suggests that consciousness is not something beyond a physical being, and in fact, body’s presence is an essential pre-requisiteforhumanknowledgesubject.Through embodimentandtheirlivedexperienceintheworld,individuals expandtheirperceptionandbodycannotbeseparatedfromway

ofthinking

Physical reflection in encounter with artworks

Inarthistory,oftenlittleattentionhasbeenpaidtothefact

thatinteractionofspectatorandaudienceencounteringa

paint-ing, sculpture, or even architecture can lead to physical and

sensual reactions in them Although in mid nineteenth

cen-turytheorycircleofGermanartandtheoristssuchasTheodor

Lipps,RobertLipps,RobertWisher,andHeinrichWolfflinhad

extensivelyaddressedsensualandphysicalreactionsofthe

audi-enceinencounterwithartwork,theirviewswereoftenignored

bydominantacademicartisticviewsofthenineteenthcentury

(Freedberg&Gallese,2007).Intheseacademicviews,feelings

wereoftenconsideredasacharacteristicloweringexcellent

val-uesofthe artwork.Thebelief thatarthasnothingtodowith

motivatingsensesandfeelingsandmustbedistinguishedfrom

physicalandbodilyterritoriesandstudiedasamerelycognitive

topicformedthedominantviewofthetheoryofart.Someother

artistichistoriansbelievedthatalthoughsomeartisticimagesare

abletostimulatefeelingsanddesiresofspectators,artisticaspect

ofartworks,isnotdiscussedinthehistoryandtheoryofart.In

contemporaryarttheory,affectedbyMerleau-Ponty’sviews,a

clearandquitesensibleattentionhasbeendedicatedtophysical

empathyofaudiencewithartwork,andtheoristsunderlinethe

extraordinaryimportanceofaudiencebodyindevelopmentof

thesefeelings.PeoplesuchasMichaelFreed,RozalinCrows,

Ant Michelsen, andRobertMaurice, influenced by

Merleau-Ponty, made many attempts in understanding and analyzing

thebodilyandsensualrelationshipofaudiencewithart-work

BorrowingMerleau-Ponty’sdiscoursesregardingphysical

per-ception,thesetheoristsarguethatinencounteringwithartworks,

bodyactsasagroundonwhichrelationsofthespectatorwith

theobservedartworkisdeveloped,andgivenmeaning

Asdiscussed,accordingtoMerleau-Ponty,bodyisthecenter

ofperceptiveexperience inestheticexperience For

Merleau-Ponty,perceptionandunderstandingofspectatorfromartwork

is,inessence,asmuchphysicalasitismental.Intheprocessof

spectatinganartwork,inadditiontovisualinteractionbetween

spectatorandthe work, asense of dynamic andtactile

inter-actionemerges Therefore,in Merleau-Ponty’sview, “Seeing

and moving are also interwoven in such a way that in

visi-blephenomena,dynamicinferenceisalwayspresent”(Carman,

2011:269).Seeingisnevermerelyoptical,butseeingsomething

callstoparticipationinnerawarenessoftheindividualfromtheir

surroundingenvironmentandhowtheycanmoveandinteract

withtheenvironment.AccordingtoMerleau-Ponty,light,color,

anddepthembeddedinanartworkonlyfindmeaningbecause

theycancreateaphysical reflection inthebody of the

audi-ence.Merleau-Pontyaddressesthephysicalbasisinpaintingand

mentionsCézanne’spaintings asthe mostdistinguished

sam-plesofphysicalperception.InCézanne’s Doubt,Merleau-Ponty

seesCézanne’smethodofpressingpaintbrushinhispaintings

as a wayof mixing the painting withthe surrounding world

andbelievesthateachspotofcolorinCézanne’sworkscanbe

consideredasarepresentationofamomentoffeelingand

expe-rience.InencounterwithCézanne’sworks,ourperceptionofthe

colorofthingsisnotlimitedtovisualexperience,butislikea

contextthatinvolvesothersensessuchastactilityandolfaction:

“Weseethedepth,thesmoothness, thesoftness,thehardness

ofobjects;Cezanneevenclaimedthatweseetheirodor.Ifthe painter istoexpressthe·world,thearrangementofhiscolors mustcarrywithitthisindivisiblewhole,orelsehispicturewil onlyhintatthingsandwilnotgive‘themintheimperiousunity, the presence, the insurpassable plenitudewhichis for us the definitionofthereal”(Merleau-Ponty,1964:15)

that viewing an object means getting inhabiting that object and“visualinvolvementwiththingsisnotunderstandingtheir appearance,butissensingphysicalaffinityofthemwithus,in mixingwiththingsandinhabitingthem”(Carman,2011:270) Merleau-Pontystresseslocation-orientationofpaintingandthe factthat“paintingisatypeoflocalart”andconsidersitasa con-textinwhich“theeyedwellsinthesamewayahumanbeinglives

intheir home”(Carman,2011:272–275).Themost important thinginthevisualperceptionprocessofartworks,assuggested

byMerleau-Ponty,istoemphasizethatspectatingisinterwoven withpresenceandphysicalinteractionwiththework’sspace Merleau-Ponty’stheoryofinterweaving,meaningbeinginthe world,islikefluctuationandfluiditybetweenselfandothersand propoundsphysicalrelationshipbetweensubjectandbodyofthe world.ThisideawhichwasexplainedinMerleau-Ponty’sworks, referstointerweavingofselfandothers,andatypeofgestalt overlappingbetweentheperceivingsubjectandtheperceived object.Merleau-Ponty’sfamousexampleofthecontactand fric-tionbetweentwohandsgreatlyhelpsinunderstandingthispoint:

“whenItouchmyrighthandwithmyleft,myrighthand,asan object,hasthestrangepropertyofbeingabletofeeltoo.Wehave justseenthatthetwohandsareneversimultaneouslyinthe rela-tionshipof touchedandtouchingtoeach other.WhenIpress

mytwohandstogether,itisnotamatteroftwosensationsfelt togetherasoneperceivestwoobjectsplacedsidebyside,butof

anambiguousset-upinwhichbothhandscanalternatetherôles

of‘touching’andbeing‘touched”’(Merleau-Ponty,1962:80) AccordingtoMerleau-Ponty’sintertwinedphenomenology,in theprocessofviewinganartwork,theactoflooking atalways leadstolooked at,andtherefore,thereisnothingasperception withoutconcert.Fromthispointofview,inencounterwith artis-ticworks,Merleau-Ponty,rejectingtheideaofdisengagement anddistinction,suggeststhat,encounteringanartwork,the spec-tatorisabletoenterperceptionofthingsthathavebeensketched

intheartwork,andthisoccursthroughempathicsympathyofthe spectatorwiththework.Although Merleau-Pontystressesthe importanceofsubjectinhisphilosophy,hisimportantpointof discussionistoemphasizemovementandtransitionfrom Carte-siansinglethinkingmind-orientedcognitiontoaparticipating embodiedsubjectentangledwiththeworldandconnectedwith otherembodiedsubjects.Therefore,toMerleau-Ponty, subjec-tivityisnotanindependent,static,andindividualidentity;rather,

itisnecessaryforsubjectivitytoopenitselftoothersandmove fromselftoothers;“aspartsofmybodytogetherforma struc-ture,bodyofanotherindividualandminearealsoaunitedwhole; twoaspectsofasinglephenomenon.Itismybodythatunveils

metotheuniverse,creatingastatusfor methereamong oth-ers humans(Itiswhatadvancesme towardtheworld,future, andothers)”(PiraviVanak,2010:117–118).Fromthispointof

view,Merleau-Pontyusesinter-subjectivityinstead of

subjec-tiveactivenessandstressesthatsubjectivity,perse,apartfrom

theworldandinaccessibleforothers,doesnotexist;rather,itis

arelationwiththeworld,anopennesstoothers.Embodied

sub-ject,initsopenness,seeksanendlessdialogandalwaysflowing

withothers(Glen,2010:20–21).InPhenomenology of

invokingchangescanleavegreateffectsininvolvedindividuals

(Merleau-Ponty,1962:240–241)

Encounter and symbiosis based on embodiment

in art education

UsingMerleau-Ponty’sviewscanalsobeveryhelpfulin

rela-tiontoarteducation.Intheprocessofarteducation,insteadof

consideringitselfandothersasoppositepoles,encounterand

dialogconfiguretheconceptofselfandotherinaquitedynamic

andalwaysmetamorphosingrelationship.Merleau-Pontyplaces

emotionandempathyastherootandbasisofallinter-subjective

encounters.Empathyistheactof“feelinginsideanother

individ-ual”.InGerman,einfuhlung(=empathy)isderivedfromfuhlen

(=to feel) andcoefuhl (=emotion) (Barasch, 1998) In Greek

etymology,thetermempathyisderivedfromempatheia,which

is inturn, derived from the term pathein,and refers to

feel-ing insideanotherindividual Through empathy, bodymoves

toward the outside world and does not remain limited inits

range Empathycan, from thispointof view, be assumed as

projectingoutside, moving outside of oneself,andan

expan-siontotheoutsideworld.InOn the Problem of Empathy,Edith

Stein analyzes the concept of empathy Stein writes, “When

I now interpret it as asensing living body andempathically

project myself into it, I obtain a new image1 of the spatial

worldand anewzero pointof orientation” (Stein, 1989:69)

Sheaddresses thelocation-orientedandspace-orientednature

ofempathy,stressingthatputtingoneselfinanother’splace,in

exactsenseoftheword,meansbeinglocatedintheother’splace

andspace.Intheprocessofdialogandinteractionconcerning

artworks,eachlearnerempathizeswithotherlearnersandtheir

livedworlds,thusdevelopingamovementbeyondhis/her

limi-tations.Fromthisviewpoint,theimportanceofempathy-based

arteducationcanbeaddressed,wheretheindividualattempts

toputthemselvesinothers’perspectivesandlookatthe

sub-ject through others’ eyes, thus surpassing the limitations of

single-eyevision,withthissurpassingbeingaccompaniedwith

a typeof expansion toexperiencing others’ lived experience

(Yacek,2014).Throughempathicreactions,thelearnerattempts

toviewtheworldthroughothers’perspective,whichessentially

meansthat theindividualisinvolvedinspaceandtime

occu-piedby others Afterthe individual placedthemselves inthe

placeof anotherindividualandlookedattheartworkthrough

their perspective,he/she triestomatchthat viewwithhis/her

livedexperience, andtherefore,the learner getsinvolvedina

stateof“self-unleashing”,whichmeansbydisengagementfrom

oneselfandlimitationsofCartesiansubjectivity,theindividual

can open andexpand themselves toother plausible horizons

(Premuzic,2009:46).Therefore,intheprocessofarteducation,

pluralityofstatusesandvarietyofperspectivesthroughwhich

subjectsviewtheartworkmustbeconsidered.So,asaresultof theproducedspatialfluidquality,learnerswillbeabletomove alongpluralperspectivesproducedthroughotherparticipants, lookingattheartworkthroughtheirangleofview.The multi-perspectivitydevelopedthroughvarietyofperspectivescreatesa stimulatingandalwaysflowingspacethat,bystimulatingpeople

tothinkingandinvolvingtheirlivedexperiencesintheprocess

of artwork perception,givesemergence opportunityto differ-entcreations.Inthisspace,peopleareencouragedtoseetheir livedworldsinadynamicandalwaysflowingrelationwithlived worldsofotherpeople.Thisdynamicinteractionofideasand livedspacesindialogprocessallowsstudentstoputtogetherand formdiscretesegmentsbygestaltthinkingontheirdesired total-ities,andeachconstructedwholeissubjecttoconstantchanges andmetamorphoses.Itcouldbearguedthatarteducationspace mustbeconsideredasanenvironmentproviding“encounters” throughwhichandbyhighlightingtheviewthroughother per-spectives and expansion of oneself to others, awareness and personalperceptionofselfandtheworldexpands

Another very important point, also addressed inHusserl’s worksapartfromMerleau-Ponty’s,istiminganddynamismof the process of perception.ForMerleau-Ponty, viewingis not

aprocessinvolvinglookataseriesofconstantimages, semi-photographedimages,butanalwayschangingperceptionofthe thingsthatexpandovertimeandareonlyperceivablethrough ourbodilymovements.Merleau-Pontystatesthatnoartist com-pletes the paintingof their work;that is,an artwork is nota defining event, but just abeginning opened to a perspective and will never be closed From this point of view, it could

be argued that in art education, neither teacher nor pupil no educationalenvironment,doexistinapredefinedway.Rather, theyarecreatedintheprocessofdialogandencounterinstantly (Springgay, 2008) Thistypeof art education does not mean attempting tolearn,know,andthenteachothers,butsuch an artworkisatypeofparticipationand“encounter”withanevent, whichisindefinite.Thiswithdrawalmeansfreeingthe individ-ualfromdefinitionsandidentitiesthatrestricthimintheirbeing, thusenabling emergence ofmanypossibilities.Anotherpoint Merleau-Pontydiscussesandisessential withregardtoartis theideaof“coexistence”whichdealswithinter-subjectivityand negationofabsolutism:“ourperspectivesmergeintoeachother, and we co-exist through a common world.” (Merleau-Ponty,

2004:153) Teachingart based on encounter and coexistence alwayspresumesanotherinitself,whichmeansthatindividuals cannotrecognizethemselveswithoutconnectingwitheachother andtheworld.Unliketraditionalclasseswherelearnersact inde-pendently,thistypeofeducationbasedonembodiment,seeksto secureanenvironmentthatcan,byshapinginteractionbetween learnersintheirrelationshipwithartworks,createadynamism andmotioninfeelingsofindividuals

Conclusion

Merleau-Ponty’scritiqueonmind-orientedmindof enlight-enment, addresses the role of embodiment as afundamental subject in educational discussions Merleau-Ponty’s discus-sionstressesthenecessityofattentiontolivedparticipationof

embodiedsubjectineducational spaceandaddressesthe

sig-nificanceofintersubjectiverelationshipinadvancementofthe

processofeducationandlearning.WhileinCartesian

philoso-phy,whatcanbelearntfromtheworld,isonlyobtainedfrom

asubjectiveposition,inMerleau-Ponty’sdiscourse,itis

inter-twinementwith the worldthe results inmeaning Borrowing

Merleau-Ponty’sdiscourse, art educationcan be viewedas a

physical and location-oriented phenomenon which is related

with location-orientation and physicality of other learners

Reviewingtheconceptofbodyinarteducationprocess,

emo-tionsandempathyalsoplayasignificantandvaluable rolein

howlearnersencounterartworks,andindividualscanperceive

artworksbasedontheirlivedexperiencesand,inthedialog

pro-cess,becomeacquaintedwithlivedworldsofotherlearners.It

couldbeargued thatstressing embodiedexperienceas

essen-tialfocusofperceptioninarteducationandpayingattentionto

educationbasedonsensualexperiencewillresultindeeperand

moreeffectivelearning

References

Barasch, M (1998).Modern theories of art 2: From impressionism to Kandinsky.

New York: NYU Press.

Carman, T (2011).Merleau-Ponty(M Olya, trans.) Tehran: Ghoghnous Pub.

Dewey, J (2004).Democracy and education.North Chelmsford: Dover

Publi-cations.

Diprose, R (2012).Corporeal generosity: On giving with Nietzsche,

Merleau-Ponty, and Levinas.New York: State University of New York Press.

Freedberg, D., & Gallese, V (2007) Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(5),197–203.

Giroux, H., & McLaren, P (1991) Radical pedagogy as cultural politics: Beyond the discourse of critique and anti-utopianism In D E Morton,

& M Zavarzadeh (Eds.),Theory/pedagogy/politics: Texts for change(pp 152–186) Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Glen, C J (2010) Inter-facing reflexive pedagogy.SFU Educational Review,

4,13–25.

La Caze, M., & Lloyd, H M (2011) Editors’ introduction: Philosophy and affective turn.Parrhesia, 13,1–13.

Merleau-Ponty, M (1962).Phenomenology of perception.London: Routledge Merleau-Ponty, M (1964).Sense and non-sense.Evanston: Northwestern Uni-versity Press.

Merleau-Ponty, M (2004).Maurice Merleau-Ponty: Basic writings.New York: Routledge.

Ollis, T (2012).A critical pedagogy of embodied education: Learning to become

an activist.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Nietzsche, F W (2001).Thus spoke Zarathustra(D Ashuri, trad.) Tehran: Agah Pub.

Peery, R S (2008).Nietzsche, philosopher of the perilous perhaps.New York: Algora Pub.

Piravi Vanak, M (2010).Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology.Abadan: Porsesh Pub.

Premuzic, D T (2009).Merleau-Ponty: Philosophy and meaning(M.R Abul-ghasemi, trad.) Tehran: Markaz Pub.

Springgay, S (2008).Body knowledge and curriculum: Pedagogies of touch in youth and visual culture.New York: Peter Lang.

Stein, E (1989).On the problem of empathy.Washington: ICS Publications Yacek, D (2014) Learning to see with different eyes: Nietzsche on the pedagogy of perspectival empathy. Educational Theory, 64(2),

99–121.