There is currently a vigorous debate in film studies and related disciplines about the extent to which scientific paradigms like evolutionary psychology and neuroscience can explain the cinema and other artforms. This debate tends to devolve into extreme positions, with many film scholars and other humanists insisting that science has little or no role to play in the study of the arts, while a minority contends that it is always needed to fully account for cultural phenomena like film.



Malcolm Turvey advocates for a more moderate position. He argues that, while the sciences can explain much about film and the other arts, there is much about these phenomena that only humanistic methods can account for. He thereby mounts a trenchant defence of the purpose and value of humanistic explanation, one that nevertheless acknowledges and welcomes the legitimate contribution of the sciences to the study of the arts.