One of the main issues raised at the Conference was the defini- tion and scope of the field. Neuroaesthetics is often conceived as the study of the neural basis of the production and appreciation of artworks (Changeux, 1994; Nalbantian, 2008; Zeki, 1998, 2001; Zeki & Lamb, 1994). However, Brown and Dissanayake (2009) argued that because art goes beyond aesthetic concerns, this definition is too broad in that it attempts to account for the biological underpinnings of artistic behavior, which includes a number of cognitive and affective mechanisms that have no aes- thetic relevance. Hence, they contend that in addition to neuroaes- thetics, a field of neuroartsology is required. In contrast.
