Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Artwork involves a freedom that belongs not only to the artist but also to the audience.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Gadamer argues that artwork carries its own historically-sedimented meaning through 'Wirkungsgeschichte', constraining rather than liberating audience interpretation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If tradition and the work's own horizon pre-structure understanding, audience 'freedom' is better described as guided disclosure than existentialist engaged freedom.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Bourdieu's sociology of aesthetic reception shows that responses are conditioned by habitus and cultural capital, not freely chosen engagement.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
What existentialists call 'engaged freedom' in the audience may be ideological misrecognition of socially determined dispositions masquerading as autonomous response.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
In existentialist terms, freedom is 'engaged' — irreducibly caught up in engagement and forced to respond.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The artwork creates a situation in which both artist and audience are implicated in this engaged freedom.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.