A Defence of the Music Arousal Theory Based on the Aristotle's Catharsis

IntroductionThe philosophy of music is a branch of philosophy that studies the meaning of music, the relationship between the artist and the creation of music, the relationship between the audience and music, and such issues. Since emotions and feelings constitute the meaning of music, the primary focus of theorists in this field is devoted to the fundamental question of where the emotional impact of music originates from. In the philosophy of music, there are two rival theories regarding the source of musical emotions: the expressive theory, which prioritizes the emotions of the artist in creating the work and considers the meaning of music in the expression of the artist's emotions, and the arousal theory, which gives priority to the emotions evoked in the listener and considers the meaning and purpose of music in eliciting the emotions of the audience.The aim of this research is to facilitate the scientific examination of the relationship between music and emotions. The specific objectives of this research are as follows: _ Introducing and examining the most important theories and discussions in the philosophy of music. _ Investigating the most important criticisms that have been made on various theories in the philosophy of music and showing the efforts of theorists and philosophers to respond to these criticisms. _ Showing that old theories put forward by philosophers like Aristotle can still be relevant in current philosophical discussions. This highlights the importance of mastering the history of philosophy for researchers in this field. _ Demonstrating that music can (or even should) be subject to contemplation and philosophical inquiry. This research is classified as fundamental research in terms of the data collection method, which is qualitative research using a library research approach. Additionally, this research specifically utilizes up-to-date and primary sources in the field of philosophy of music. Research Question(s)Which of these two theories of Expression and Arousal provides a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between music and emotions and offers a better explanation of our emotional experiences when confronted with music?Which theory can better respond to the criticisms raised against it? Literature ReviewSome of the most important articles published on the arousal theory of music are as follows (in chronological order):Mew, P (1984) The musical arousal of emotions.British Journal of Aesthetics 25 (4):357-361.Robinson, J (1994) The expression and arousal of emotion in music. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 52 (1):13-22. Beever, A. (1998) The Arousal Theory Again? The British Journal of Aesthetics 38(1):82-90.Kingsbury, J (1999) Why the Arousal Theory of Musical Expressiveness is Still Wrong? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77 (1):83 – 88.Matravers, D (2007) Musical expressiveness. Philosophy Compass 2 (3):373–379.‌ Arbo, A. (2009) Some Remarks on “Hearing-as” and its Role in the Aesthetics of Music. Topoi 28 (2):97-107.Cochrane, T. (2010) Music, Emotions and the Influence of the Cognitive Sciences. Philosophy Compass 5 (11):978-988.Eerola, T. (2016) Being Moved by Unfamiliar Sad Music Is Associated with High Empathy. Frontiers in Psychology 7.Levinson, j (2016) Music-Specific Emotion: An Elusive Quarry. Estetika 53 (2):115-131.Wu-Jing He (2017) Emotional Reactions Mediate the Effect of Music Listening on Creative Thinking: Perspective of the Arousal-and-Mood Hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology 8 MethodologyThis research is classified as fundamental research in terms of its objective. The general aim of this research is to establish a conceptual framework for the philosophical examination of the relationship between music and emotions ConclusionsIn response to the first question, we first need to see what each of these two theories offers in response to the most important issue regarding emotions and music, namely the issue of the "relationship between expressed emotions in music and evoked emotions in the listener." The expressive theory addresses this issue with the concept of "grounding," while the motivational theory uses the concept of "emotional codes." Our analysis shows that the concept of "emotional codes" is more effective than "grounding" for two reasons:"Grounding" is a concept that claims objectivity, while by definition, the meaning of music lies in its sensory content. The conflict between the expressive theory and the motivational theory is essentially a conflict over determining the place of sensory content in music. The expressive theory places the sensory content in the expressed emotions in the musical piece and considers these emotions as a crystallization of the emotions of the creator, while the motivational theory places the sensory content of music in the emotions evoked in the listener through music. Referring to an objective concept to explain the place of sensory content, if not a theoretical impossibility, is an additional effort that only complicates the conflict between these two theories.The concept of emotional codes conceptualizes the issue at the mental (or intermental) level and provides an effective framework for explaining the position of the sensory content of music. Different and varied reactions to music are appropriate. Furthermore, by introducing the concept of emotional codes, one can pave the way for framing research issues in an interdisciplinary context. This way, the issue of the sensory content of music can be explored in the interdisciplinary fields of musicology, philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience.Our analysis has shown that the theory of motivation with our experiential intuition is more compatible. This is because the basis of judging a musical work is the experienced emotions, not the assumed emotions that the artist intended to express. For example, when we label a piece of music as sad, it is not because the composer intended to express sad emotions, but rather it is simply and intuitively because that piece evokes a sense of sadness in us.As a result, the theory of motivation provides a better and more valid explanation of the relationship between music and emotions.In response to the second question, it is important to consider the main criticism that challenges each of these two theories and how they respond to it. Our analysis has shown that the main criticism of the expressive theory is the "expression of unexperienced emotions," and proponents of the expressive theory, in response to this criticism, question the principles of this theory. They do not necessarily consider the expressed emotions as belonging to the artist, but rather see the artist as simply a narrator of the emotions of another individual (or even a completely imaginary person). In this way, they raise the larger question of whose emotions are being expressed in music. Since the answer cannot be the audience (as that would essentially turn it into a motivational theory), this question remains shrouded in ambiguity and mystery.On the other hand, in our research, we demonstrated that the responses that have been presented to the issue of "liking sad music" are not defensible and valid. Furthermore, by using the concept of catharsis from Aristotle, we were able to propose an acceptable response to this criticism. We showed that our proposed response can address all the criticisms that were present in other responses.