Ethics and Aesthetics: Representation of Evil

Introduction
The question of relevance of ethical criticism in the evaluation of an artwork
resurfaces in the history of art and aesthetics fairly regularly. Whenever there appears an
aesthetically unique work encompassing also an ethical dimension or a moral message
the endless disputes between proponents and opponents of relevance of the ethical
criticism gain new examples and arguments.
This contribution does not aim at encompassing the whole history of squabbles
over the ethical criticism of artworks. Neither does it provide a list of proponents,
arguments nor counterarguments of individual solutions. Among all possible approaches
to this question the author chooses one only, moderate moralism elaborated by Noel
Carroll. Taking the motion picture The Smugglers of Death as an example he tries to
prove the validity and viability of Carroll’s conclusions. If the principles of moderate
moralism can be shown to hold true in this chosen case we can thus regard the chosen
approach as justified and useful in evaluating some artworks.

Moderate moralism
The relationship between ethics and aesthetics has awoken interest and attention
since the earliest times. In the Old Testament Book of Exodus we can already trace its
reverberation in the following God’s commandment: “You shall not make yourself a
carved image or any likeness of anything in heaven above or on earth beneath or in the
waters under the earth.” (Exodus 20, 4; the New Jerusalem Bible). Among those
writing on the influence of art on morality was Plato as well as Aristotle, or later Lev
Nikolayevich Tolstoy. All similar reflections come under the umbrella concept of
ethical criticism of art referring to the fact that elements of ethics are also part and
parcel of interpretation and evaluation of an artwork. Save for exceptions it is narrative
art1 which is the subject of examination and which shows some unique features to
which ethical criticism especially belongs.

1
Generally speaking, narrative art tells stories. The term “narrative art” is mostly used in connection with
fine art, but it concerns literature, dance, opera or theatre to the same extent. An intent to educate, explain,
or inspire can be inserted into narration; it often carries a moral, social or patriotic messages. Narrative
painting, for instance demands from the artist to open relationships among the portrayed characters and
place them in such a way so that their roles in the portrayed event may be clearly perceptible. Use of
allegory is another narrative strategy. Here authors of artworks narrate a story based on concepts or
general principles. We can take Picasso’s Guernica as an example or various allegories of freedom and
human life. Realist painters in turn used narration to comment on society, to criticise it or as social satire.
 The dispute over the possibility, significance and incorporation of the ethical
criticism of art in to the “aesthetic” evaluation of artwork is today linked to a general
question as to how broadly aesthetics and its subject should be defined. Should the
realm of aesthetic evaluation include the ethical value of narrative art (a) every time an
artwork represents any moral characteristics; (b) in some cases only, namely when an
artwork portrays any moral characteristics; or (c) never? (Cp. Peek 2006). George
Dickie exemplifies this tripartite dispute on the most pronounced proponents of the
given positions: “The question at issue is whether moral defects of artworks can be
aesthetic defects. Noel Carroll claims they can be, Berys Gaut claims they are, and
James Anderson and Jeffrey Dean claim they are not.” (Dickie 2005: 151).
These four men thus represent three approaches to the ethical criticism of art to
which the most attention is given at present: moderate autonomism (Anderson and
Dean), moderate moralism (Carroll) and ethicism (Gaut).
In my opinion it is moderate moralism that shows best its viability of all the
above-mentioned variants of the ethical criticism of art. Although a number of
comments may be raised about it, none of them is serious enough to disqualify it
entirely. At the basis of moderate moralism is the idea that in some cases a moral defect
in an artwork may be understood as an aesthetic defect; therefore the moral value may
establish an aesthetic value. The majority of these cases concern narrative art, as has
already been described above, “artworks with a story”. If a story of an artwork fails to
evoke an appropriate emotional response necessary for its intended impact, it then fails
as art. Such defect becomes an aesthetic defect.
Noel Carroll claims that it is narrative art that is inseparably linked with
morality. Unless they awake moral emotions in the audience narrations could not
achieve any success; they would become incomprehensible. The line of reasoning is
simple: A lot of emotions with which the audience works as a condition of
comprehensibility of narration are in fact moral emotions in the same manner as a
number of emotions contain moral elements that cannot be removed, e.g. anger. In this
sense emotions pertaining to narration are often moral emotions, as for example the
outrage which accompanies the reading of Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Thus, evoking moral
judgements in the audience is a common feature of successful narrative artworks. What
follows for Carroll from this? If understanding a narrative artwork is inextricably bound
up with moral understanding, then at least with narrative artworks it will be entirely

2
natural and obvious that they will arouse our interest in moral features and we will
consider them in the course of evaluation and critique. (Cp. Carroll 1996: 228).
Understanding a narrative artwork may involve a simultaneous process of
deepening or enlarging one’s moral understanding, which is an important element of
moral education. Moral education is not concerned with one’s acquiring new moral
rules only; it also employs understanding and practical application of these rules to
concrete situations. Understanding is not concerned with knowledge of abstract
concepts and assertions, but with the ability to use them appropriately too. This requires
practice, and it may be narrative art that may serve as such very practice of moral
understanding. (Cp. Carroll 1996: 230).
Carroll is convinced that by proving the relationship between comprehending a
narrative and moral understanding and the basis of such relationship in a characteristic
incompleteness of narrative artworks it may be possible to prove naturalness and
justifiability of the moral evaluation of art. This “incompleteness” of narration is
evident: for instance, there is no need for the author of a novel to state that his/her hero
has a head or liver. That follows from the logic of the story as long as we talk about
ordinary human beings. The readers themselves fill in the missing data. But the novel
requires more from its readers than engaging their cognitive abilities. The audience
must fill in the novel with an appropriate emotional response so as to let the required
understanding take place. For the novel to succeed as a novel it is necessary that the
audience fills it in in the right manner, including the appropriate emotional response;
that is through those emotions the artwork intends to evoke. For instance, according to
Aristotle for a tragedy to work as a tragedy it must elicit pity and fear from the
audience. Failure to elicit fear and pity is a failure of a tragedy as tragedy, therefore it is
an aesthetic failure, a failure in the design of work, sums up Carroll. (Cp. Carroll 1998:
420).

Terms
Noel Carroll neither gets into much detail in his reflections nor does he pay
needed attention to defining those terms he uses. I will try to make up for this deficit by
at least briefly defining the terms that I use in my contribution. For that matter,
ambiguity and confusion of terms is characteristic for the ethical criticism of art. Among
the concerned terms are aesthetic defect, moral defect and evil in artwork.

3
Aesthetic defect
Aesthetic defect can be very easily deduced as the opposite of aesthetic value.
An aesthetic value of an artwork follows from its aesthetic qualities. Tomáš Kulka states
that positive aesthetic values should be represented to a certain extent in every artwork
and these values must be standard; it would be desirable for every artwork to possess
these qualities to the utmost. At the basis there are three terms: unity, complexity, and
intensity. For instance, the general theory of aesthetic evaluation elaborated by an
American aesthetician, Monroe C. Beardsley, is based on these key terms.
The extent of unity of an artwork can be deduced from a possible replacement
(alteration): if a modification of constituent elements of an artwork took place, would its
aesthetic value increase or fall? The ideal solution would be comparing the artwork to
its possible versions: hypothetically to the same artwork that would differ in the
placement of one element only. “Should we find an alternative or a version of the
artwork that would clearly appear to be superior when compared with the evaluated
artwork this would mean that the element is not in its place (exactly where and in such a
way it should be). However, should we find out that all the alternatives of the given
artwork are aesthetically inferior, we shall understand that the element is well
harmonized within the whole”. (Kulka 2000: 91). This implies that aesthetic judgements
as to unity of an artwork may be tested by comparing an artwork with its own
alternatives.2
It is possible to understand the term “complexity” in such a way that the more
complex an artwork is, the greater the plurality and diversity of its constitutive features.
Last but not least intensity; in a maximally intensive artwork all its elements have their
aesthetic sense and they contain neither anything superfluous, replaceable, nor
removable. At issue here is the extent of particularity and irreplaceability.
An aesthetic defect can be then viewed as an error in relation to the three
aesthetic qualities. Such defect either violates the unity of the artwork, reduces its

2
Linking between the aesthetic and moral values can be clearly seen, for instance, in Lolita by Vladimir
Nabokov. It entirely confirms Noel Carroll’s argument that a moral characteristics of an artwork can
project into its aesthetic values. To support this argument we can use the aforementioned alternate
approach to determine an aesthetic value. In an adapted version of Lolita the main character Humbert
would not be a middle-aged man; on the contrary he would be of the same age as her; or Lolita could still
live with her mother but she would already be of age. The relationship between Humbert and Lolita
would then lose its dimension of morally abject paedophilia and become an ordinary love story. The
novel would thus lose on its aesthetic value at least as concerns the issue of intensity (it would fail to
elicit such strong response from the audience and it would lose some of the tension) or complexity (the
diversity of its constituent elements would decrease). The moral “defect” incorporated within Lolita has a
direct influence on its aesthetic value.

4
complexity or weakens its intensity.

Moral defect
Howbeit the determination of what is “moral” and what is not may continuously
change and transform, still the basic characteristic by Roger Scruton holds true: “People
are bound by moral laws which express the idea of a community of rational beings
living in mutual respect and solving their disputes through negotiation and agreement. “
(Scruton 2003: 91). Thus, morality and morals denote a set of generally binding rules of
conduct valid in a particular human community. If we call particular behaviour ethical
or moral it means that such behaviour is in accord with valid morality or that it is
grounded in morality, in the ethics of the acting person. On the contrary, if someone is
called immoral, their behaviour does not correspond to the moral code accepted by the
majority or they have a corrupted character. (Cp. Urban 2005).
Four basic independent sources of moral argumentation can be distinguished in
Scruton’s concept of morality, ranked according to the degree of seriousness and order
when making decisions: personality and moral law linked to it; ethics of virtue;
affection; and reverence. If a moral problem, a dilemma occurs, it springs from those
places where the four above-mentioned types of thinking offer contradictory results.
(Cp. Scruton 2003: 98).
From the concept of morality described above we can deduce the meaning of the
term of moral defect. Talking about an artwork which contains a moral defect, such
artwork may be defective for four various reasons:
1. Moral attitudes of the artwork are in stark contrast with the viewer’s
personality and moral law associated with this personality;
2. Moral attitudes of the artwork call into question or attack the general concept
of virtue and virtuous conduct;
3. Moral attitudes of the artwork make it impossible to develop pity towards
one’s neighbour, usually to the person depicted in the artwork. They make it
impossible to develop respect to one’s neighbour.
4. Moral attitudes of the artwork reject piety, sense of one’s own limitedness and
fragility, and willingness to let oneself be guided and instructed.

5
Evil in artwork
If we focus on how a moral defect of an artwork develops into evil, we can
arrive at three basic ways: Firstly, certain immoral activities took place in creating an
artwork. Here the film Last Tango in Paris, 1973 can be taken as an example, in which
director Bernardo Bertolucci forced Marlon Brand to rape actress Maria Schneider right
in front of the camera in order to make the sex scene between them look as real as
possible. Secondly, an artwork may have an immoral influence either direct or indirect.
For instance, we may talk about films showing sexual activities with minors which then
spread through criminal paedophile networks and play part in creating their criminal
activities. In contrast to these two ways in which the immorality either precedes or
follows an artwork there is a third option: an artwork may be morally degraded by
limitations flowing from the nature of art, namely when the content of artwork come up
against the boundaries of art. (Cp. Gerwen 2004).
Nick Trakakis (2006) states that everything that negatively and destructively
affects human life can be generally termed as evil. The sphere of evil thus embraces
categories such as evil, wrong, immoral and harmful. Through an analysis of the term of
evil in this rather broad sense Trakakis arrives at the conclusion that to term a given
phenomenon as evil, it must share some of the following:
a. Certain harm that may occur to the bodily well-being or to the peace of mind
of a sentient personality (pain and suffering);
b. Unjust treatment of a sentient personality;
c. Loss of opportunities following from untimely death (the opportunity of
growing old and dying “in a natural way”);
d. Anything preventing an individual to lead a fulfilled and virtuous life (e.g.
poverty or prostitution);
e. A person performing a moral wrong (a free decision to act immorally);
f. Lack of good (absence or lack of strengths or qualities the possession of which
is natural).
Moral evil includes intentional acts of bad behaviour, for example lies or murder
in the same ways as character flaws, dishonesty, greed, viciousness and so on. (Cp.
Trakakis 2006). Trakakis’ analysis of the concept of evil may very well serve in the
search for a moral defect in an artwork. It will be sufficient for an artwork to contain
one of the above-mentioned items; we can then call it as morally defective.

6
The Smugglers of Death as a morally defective
film
The artwork mentioned most in connection with the ethical criticism of art is a
documentary film The Triumph of the Will by a German director Leni Riefenstahl
portraying the NSDAP Congress in Nuremberg in 1934. It glorifies Nazi Germany, its
leader Adolf Hitler and the planned Thousand Years’ Empire. An excellent analysis of
this film in the context of moderate moralism was made by Mary Devereaux who said
about the film: “Riefenstahl’s film portrays National Socialism (something morally evil)
as beautiful. To view the film in the way in which it was intended to be seen is to see
and be moved by (what Riefenstahl presents as) the beauty of National Socialism.”
(Devereaux 1998: 241). However, the questions that Devereaux asks, namely if it is
possible to appreciate aesthetic qualities of a film regardless of its celebration of evil, I
have asked in connection with a different work, a communist adventure and detective
story The Smugglers of Death. There are interesting parallels between this film and The
Triumph of the Will.
The Czechoslovak film The Smugglers of Death was made under the direction of
Karel Kachyňa, a renowned and respected film director; it was based on the story of
Rudolf Kalčík who also wrote the script together with František Antonín Dvořák. Josef
Illík, a man with an original visual insight was behind the camera. The film was first
shown in 1959; the story itself is set in the period shortly after the communist coup in
February 1948.
A brief background of the story: A new sergeant Karel Zeman (Jiří Vala) joins a
garrison of a newly formed frontier guards in the border area in the Šumava Mountains
of South Bohemia. Here he meets the commander, Lieutenant Václav Kot (Radovan
Lukavský) who demands a strict discipline and unreserved fulfilment of duties from his
men. He puts the interests of the group and of his profession above his own personal
problems and concerns. Outwardly Kot looks hard and heartless, but he is good, gentle
and sensitive at heart and he has understanding for his comrades in arms. However, he
knows when to push “his lads” to get the best out of them. It is, actually, in Kot’s area
that breakthroughs take place: diversionists force their way across the border from West
Germany to Czechoslovakia aiming at subverting the people’s democratic
establishment.
Against the background of an adventurous hunt for Kilián, a dangerous smuggler
of diversionists, there develops a love relationship between sergeant Zeman and a local

7
salesgirl Marie Rysová (Jiřina Švorcová). However, she is hiding a frightening secret:
her husband ran over a child when drunk driving and he has run away across the border
to escape punishment. In the end she gives in to Zeman’s charm and insistence clinging
to him as an opportunity to escape from her sorrows.
A patrol kills the armed Kilián in a shoot-out; still the mysterious smuggler of
diversionists across the Šumava Mountains carries on. Detective search for his identity
does not end yet. Before the final exposure there still comes a tragedy: Rysová’s
husband returns across the border for his wife who during an unsuccessful crossing of
the border, pursued by the frontier guards perishes in the depths of the marshes before
her husband’s as well as her lover’s eyes. Rys gets arrested afterwards and he is handed
over to justice to make reparations for his crimes. The last smuggler, the famous King
of the Šumava Mountains or the friendly gamekeeper Paleček is detected and caught red
handed. Rain clouds and fogs over the marshes clear and the sun rises and breathes new
life to tired guards led by Zeman. A smile finally even appears on Kot’s gloomy face...
Despite some flaws (it is not a work as brilliant as The Triumph of the Will nor
did its creators have such resources at their disposal) The Smugglers of Death remains a
remarkable film from the artistic point of view. Its creators showed remarkable
ingenuity when telling the story; in a number of situations they do not rely on dialogues
but make maximum use of the film language. This is made evident in the opening scene
in which the camera takes a rugged ride with Zeman to his new posting across the
marshes and deep forests. The shots of majestically grown trees symbolise the vastness
of woodland and its pensive atmosphere. The scene in which Zeman and Rysová begin
to grow close is elaborated in the same way. Instead of a dialogue which would sound
implausible and awkward, the director together with the cameraman build up visual
atmosphere of a melancholic and intimate moment which passes on to the viewer: rain
letting up slowly, howling wind, creaking rusty street lamp, shadows of figures merging
in an embrace...
The film The Smugglers of Death contains a number of miscellaneous scenes
and it is complex. Lyrical passages of scenery takes change over to action takes of a
shoot-out; civilian scenes of life of the frontier guards in the barracks are complemented
with detective pursuit of suspicious persons, static scenes of sentries switch over to the
amorous union between Zeman and Rysová so that everything may graduate in the
almost horror moment when Rysová disappears in the bottomless marsh while her
helpless lover just looks on. The work is thus very intensive; the changing of the tempo

8
and mood of the narration keeps viewers’ attention and influences their senses. Despite
the film breaking up into three levels of narration – adventurous, love and detective –
The Smugglers of Death manages to keep its unity, the last of the three main categories
of aesthetic value. However, there is one crucial precondition. The viewers accept “the
vision” as their own, the message which the film carries.
In the same way as The Triumph of the Will is based on the message of the
National Socialism and the story of the German people, its leader and empire, The
Smugglers of Death has its story and its message necessary to understand this film and
appreciate its aesthetic quality and its moral value inseparably linked to its formal
structure. Kachyňa tells a story about the strength of a collective entity to which the
individual must unconditionally surrender. He tells a story about the absolute authority
of superiors, about the building of a better communist world for which no sacrifice can
be too big. In this story the freedom of an individual has no value; his life has no value
either.
We can trace a number of further parallels between The Smugglers of Death and
The Triumph of the Will: from formal features through the message as far as the moral
repulsiveness. Both films were made at political requests. The then leadership of
communist Czechoslovakia commissioned The Smugglers of Death with two intentions
in mind: the film was to fulfil demand for adventure films of which there was no home
production (foreign films, in turn, failed to fulfil ideological criteria) but its main aim
was to celebrate the frontier guards defending the country against the breakthroughs of
diversionists coming to threaten the people’s democratic establishment. The work was a
success. At the time it was shown in cinemas The Smugglers of Death enjoyed an
enormous success with the viewers and its main protagonists got into limelight. Its
popularity with the viewers lasted until the end of the 1980s.
Although during its greatest fame and popularity in the late 1950s and early
1960s the viewers hardly considered it as propaganda that could well be compared to
films produced by the Nazis; this similarity is more evident today. It already follows
from the above-mentioned background; there was a clear political order and assignment.
The work was to spread particular ideology and preach it without any opportunity to
assess it critically. For example, no question is asked as to whether it was right that the
frontier guards shot at people. That was simply the way it was done.
A possible objection that this is not propaganda but an adventure film full of
suspense and secrets from the life of those who guard the public’s sound sleep against

9
intruders will not stand up to scrutiny. In the same manner as Mary Devereaux, referring
to the intentional error, refused to defend The Triumph of the Will as a documentary or a
purely aesthetic artwork one can refuse the emphasis on the “adventurous character” of
The Smugglers of Death. It makes no difference at all what the makers’ intentions about
the film were. What matters here is what the film contains and the way it functions.
Under the guise of a genre film, made with invention and very well formally, it has one
message to spread, namely that of communist propaganda and ideology of hatred.
Focusing on particular moral defects of this work we find a number of them,
including those that have a direct influence on the aesthetic value. The film pretends it
was necessary to guard the border against foreign diversionists threatening the state
establishment but it fails to explain how this could possibly come about. It holds back
the fact that there were also Czechoslovak citizens crossing the border, unwilling to
accept the ideology of communism and the course the country was taking, and in order
to keep their personal freedom they decided to emigrate. If the film portrays such an
emigrant, as it does in the case of Rys, then he is a weakling and a wretch; a drunk who
resists responsibility and punishment for killing a child by fleeing abroad. The people
crossing the border and taking others across the border are portrayed as greedy
individuals craving for personal interests, without any scruples, not hesitating to shoot
and kill at the first opportunity. At the same time, there is no explanation as to the
motivation behind their behaviour. For instance, even after his exposure the character of
the gamekeeper Paleček – the King of the Šumava Mountains – is still shrouded with a
secret veil. The viewer never learns why he smuggled people across the border.3
Members of the frontier guards are throughout positive heroes without any
serious flaws. They do not have to solve any crucial inner conflicts. The only character
portraying a moral dilemma is the character of the salesgirl Rysová who has to decide
whether to give away the return of her escaped husband, emigrate with him or stay with
her new lover. The dilemma her lover faces whether to stay in a demanding service or
leave with his new love is solved by coincidence, by Rysová’s tragic death.
Moral reservations as to the attitudes of the film can be summed up simply: it is
a lie, lie as a basic political programme. This lie aims at affecting the viewers too and
influencing their attitudes and opinions. Linking of formal features, innovative creative
methods and craftsman-like quality work with a message of lies thus forms a tight,
3
Rudolf Kalčík, co-author of the film script was aware of this weak point. He therefore added a chapter
to a later book version of The Smugglers of Death which included Paleček’s confession; thus making
clear his motivation.

10
inseparable mixture. If the viewers did not accept the offered polarisation of characters
into good frontier guards and bad intruders they would make it impossible for
themselves to understand the film and grasp the offered story. It can be seen very well
with the very character of the King, the gamekeeper Paleček. He commits no evident
crime in the film. However, he is always talked about as someone who takes people
across the border; if the viewers do not accept the message that it is a crime to cross the
border (to leave Czechoslovakia) they will not understand why catching him is of such
importance. For that matter, we could imagine a situation in a stark contrast to what the
film has to offer. The gamekeeper Paleček can be an altruist who in a disinterested way
helps take across the border every person that puts personal freedom above everything
else. A number of real-life “smugglers” were like that. For instance, he can represent a
freedom fighter that helps destroy the criminal communist regime by bringing German
and American agents across the border.
Thus we can see that Noel Carroll’s moderate realism really works; it is a viable
concept enabling us to explain confusion we feel about some artworks: we appreciate
their polished formal aspects; however we refuse to accept their immoral message.
We can close the analysis of the film The Smugglers of Death with a summary
offered by a film historian Pavel Taussig in a bonus supplement to the DVD with the
film. In his view the makers put all their craft and skill in the service of a political
project that contrary to historical truth showed the victims of the frontier guards as the
representatives of evil, not as people longing so much for freedom that they do not
hesitate to even put their lives at risk. In fact, the makers of the film themselves became
the propagators of evil.

Final summary
Moderate moralism defined by Noel Carroll represents the best answer to the
question about the relationship between ethics and aesthetics. It is not very difficult to
find in artworks that surround us such a moral defect directly influencing the aesthetic
value of the artwork.
It is the case of the film by director Leni Riefenstahl The Triumph of the Will
which has been excellently analysed by Mary Devereaux in her essay Beauty and Evil.
Devereaux showed in a convincing way that the moral aspect of a film shares in its
aesthetic value in a fundamental way. Even if we insisted that a moral defect is not an
aesthetic defect, we cannot determine correctly the aesthetic value of an artwork without

11
taking into account its moral dimension. In order words she confirms Noel Carroll’s
words when claiming that some moral defects can manifest themselves in the aesthetic
value of an artwork too.
I have come to the same conclusion through my own analysis of the film The
Smugglers of Death. The Smugglers of Death also contains such moral defects that if we
ignore them we even cannot understand the film, let alone determine its aesthetic value.
Can evil portrayed in an artwork be the cause of an aesthetic defect then? I am
convinced that it certainly can in some cases that I have described in this essay.
However, as both Devereaux and Carroll point out it is not possible to generalise this
statement too much as it always applies to a particular artwork. Also, such works
linking firmly and inseparably the categories of good and evil are exceptional even in
the world of art. For that matter, each artwork is unique and influences its audience in
an unrepeatable way. In the same way as evil related with beauty.

12
Bibliography:
CARROLL, Noel. Moderate Moralism. British Journal of Aesthetics, 1996, Vol. 36,
No. 5, pp. 223-238.
CARROLL, Noel. Moderate Moralism versus Moderate Autonomism. British Journal
of Aesthetics, 1998, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 419-424.
DEVEREAUX, Mary. Beauty and evil: the case of Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the
Will. In LEVINSON, Jerrold (ed.): Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp. 227-256.
DICKIE, George. The Triumph in Triumph of the Will. British Journal of Aesthetics,
2005, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 151-156.
GERWEN, Rob van. Ethical Autonomism: The Work of Art as a Moral Agent.
Contemporary Aesthetics, 2004, Vol. 2 [online]. Posted in 2004 [quoted on 2007-05-
25]. To be accessed at:
http://www.contempaesthetics.org/newvolume/pages/article.php?articleID=217.
KULKA, Tomáš. Umění a kýč. (Art and Kitsch.). Prague: Torst, 2000. 292 pp. ISBN
80-7215-128-2.
Narrative Art. National Gallery of Art Teaching Resource [online]. Posted in 2007
[quoted on 2007-05-22]. To be accessed at:
http://www.nga.gov/education/american/narrative.shtm.
SCRUTON, Roger. An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Philosophy. (Průvodce
inteligentního člověka filosofií). Brno: Barrister & Principal, 2003. 137 pp. ISBN 80-
85947-91-9.
TRAKAKIS, Nick. The Evidential Problem of Evil. The Internet Encyclopaedia of
Philosophy [online]. Posted in 2006 [quoted on 2007-05-15]. To be accessed at:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/evil-evi.htm.
URBAN, Petr. Co je filosofická etika? (What is Philosophical Ethics?) A philosophical
ethics lecture series [online]. Jihočeská univerzita, Faculty of Theology, Department of
Philosophy and Religious Studies. Posted in 2005 [quoted on 2007-05-30]. To be
accessed at: http://www.tf.jcu.cz/cz_lmenu/katedry/filosof/getfile.php?
filenamex=prednaskycelek_pdf.

13