Mirror and canonical neurons are not constitutive of aesthetic response.

The alleged neural basis of empathic responses to artworks is only of marginal relevance for aesthetics and for cognitive theories of art, contrary to Gallese and Freedberg [1]. The activity of the mirror neuron system (MNS) has been claimed to provide the neural underpinnings for several mental capacities, including, but not limited to, imitation, mindreading, language understanding and concept formation. According to Gallese and Freedberg [1], MNS or so-called ‘canonical’ neurons (or both) are crucially involved in our aesthetic appreciation as well. The claim concerns both the representational content and the vehicle of artworks. There are empathic responses to the representational content of artworks in which actions, objects and sensory interactions (e.g. human bodies being touched or wounded) are displayed; and responses to vehicles (e.g. paint on canvas, sculpted surfaces) in which the gestures of artists are readable from the traces they left (e.g. brushwork). The idea is presented as a major step forward in a landscape of aesthetic studies where the only cognitively relevant aspects of art are ‘disembodied’ ones, and as new support for neglected or forgotten studies in which Update TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.xxx No.x