Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Fine arts museums display objects for reasons other than ... — Carmelics
    Home/Aesthetics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The display of an object in a fine arts museum does not constitute strong or definitive evidence that the object is a work of art.

    Fine arts museums display objects for reasons other than their status as art, such as historical context or aesthetic interest.

    Aesthetics
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Aesthetics

    Related

    Even if a museum's primary business is displaying art, it has other functions an...Fine arts museums display working clothes and palettes of artists, which are not...The display of an object in a fine arts museum does not constitute strong or def...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Aesthetics
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Museums display such objects for reasons other than those objects bein...87%Fine arts museums display working clothes and palettes of artists, whi...84%Duchamp's Fountain may be displayed in a museum not because it is a wo...83%The display of an object in a fine arts museum does not constitute str...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: beardsley-aesthetics
    View source passageHide passage
    Beardsley never explicitly responded to this objection, but he wouldn’t be fazed. The objection assumes that if an object is displayed in a museum—a fine arts museum, not a history museum or any other sort of museum—or if an art historian or art critic discusses an object, then it must be a work of art, or at least that there’s very strong reason to think that it’s a work of art. That it’s some reason to think so Beardsley wouldn’t deny; but that it’s necessarily a strong or definitive reason he

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective