why do we enjoy poetry From the perspective of neuroscience?

[Belacqua]

I'd answer that yes, it definitely does tell us useful things.  I'm of the camp that thinks quick scanners will eventually be able to track ideas in real-time.  With large enough statistical samples and clever enough algorithms, we might have a better understanding of how people respond to poetry than individuals can express, precisely because feelings can't be expressed well with words.

Interesting to get back to the thread topic!

I certainly agree that there is every indication that brain tech will continue to improve, and to tell us more and more about what's going on in there. What I don't see is how any of that will help us understand, or tell us anything non-trivial, about a work of art. And why not is a very interesting question. It calls into question what exactly happens when we experience a symphony or a great painting, etc. And where, exactly, the aesthetic experience occurs. Not in the sense of "what part of the brain," but in the sense of "is it ideas, feelings, some combination; is it subconscious, conscious; is the observable felt response of any real interest?" There is some way in which a work of art lives and operates outside of the individual mind, as a cultural artifact, as a Popperian World Three object, as a touchpoint throughout one's life. 

So let's do an easy example. Here is a poem from Blake's Songs of Innocence: 

Little Lamb who made thee 
         Dost thou know who made thee 
Gave thee life & bid thee feed. 
By the stream & o'er the mead; 
Gave thee clothing of delight, 
Softest clothing wooly bright; 
Gave thee such a tender voice, 
Making all the vales rejoice! 
         Little Lamb who made thee 
         Dost thou know who made thee 

         Little Lamb I'll tell thee, 
         Little Lamb I'll tell thee!
He is called by thy name, 
For he calls himself a Lamb: 
He is meek & he is mild, 
He became a little child: 
I a child & thou a lamb, 
We are called by his name. 
         Little Lamb God bless thee. 
         Little Lamb God bless thee.

Now, what could we discover by observing the brain of someone reading this? I suspect that depending on the individual, there would be some mixture of boredom, or agreement, or disagreement -- perhaps revulsion by people who post here, who dislike this kind of sentiment. Quantifying that would not be of interest, though. 

What is good to know is that the poem is intentionally naive, boring, and wrong. The Songs of Innocence are not about innocence, they are spoken by innocence. So this is not Blake's opinion being spoken, it is the opinion of someone who is naive, boring, and wrong. It is to be contrasted with its counterpart in The Songs of Experience, the more famous Tiger poem, which expresses the opinion of someone who knows that little lambs are killed for veal. Or I shouldn't say it's the opinion of experience, because the Tiger poem is all questions. How could God, who is supposed to be good, do this? 

Depending on a person's level of experience, education, religious faith, and attention, the reading of the two poems can develop over years. 

So serious, non-snarky question: what can going into an MRI machine add to our understanding, in regard to this poem?

Another example: I grew up in a small town with no art. I had books from the library though, and I loved to look at pictures of paintings by van Eyck. When I was 17 I went to London and saw a van Eyck painting (the Arnolfini wedding portrait) in the flesh for the first time. This was absolutely thrilling for me -- the painting is almost supernaturally beautiful, in that it is more subtle and richer than any mass produced item has ever been. It's this experience, and this added hands-on knowledge, that makes the painting meaningful. Not to get all Platonic, but the beauty points to higher things. Remember what Stendhal said: beauty is the promise of happiness. Not happiness, but the promise of it. 

These infinite and ongoing connections are, for me, what any art is about. And again, in a totally non-snarky way, I just don't see what a brain scientist is going to do for me.