 Although Monroe Beardsley (1982) often spoke positively of Dewey’s notion of aesthetic experience, he thought that Dewey was obsessed with the dangers of dualism and that he talked about “separation” in a misleading way. Dewey thinks the practices of hanging paintings in special buildings would deny continuity between art and life. Yet Beardsley sees no real problem here, for people who see a painting in a museum bring their culture with them. Also, against Dewey’s stress on continuity, Beardsley thought that discontinuity in nature and in culture is required for the emergence of genuine novelty in art. As opposed to Dewey, Beardsley stressed the ways in which art is independent, relatively self-sufficient, and autonomous to a degree. Alan Goldman (2005) argued that Beardsley borrows too much from Dewey’s obscure discussion of experience, but articulates better than Dewey the idea that aesthetic experience is a matter of complete engagement of our faculties with both instrumental and intrinsic benefits. More recently, Goldman (2013) has developed what he calls “the broad view of aesthetic experience”, whose similarities to Dewey’s view he readily acknowledges.