Skip to content

Topics Thinkers Changes ContributorsLoading 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

Made within

DC&

Austin

Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

Providing a general definition of art applicable to all a... — Carmelics

Home/Aesthetics

History Edit See Inverse

Providing a general definition of art applicable to all art is particularly complex

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

1 reason for

2 reasons against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

?

1.Conceptual art is profoundly revisionary and difficult to classify
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.The advent of conceptual art challenges any attempt at a general definition of art
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

2 perspectives

Reason against 1 of 2

?

1.Proceduralist definitions (Dickie's Institutional Theory) classify art by relational context, not intrinsic properties, accommodating any object including conceptual works.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.If the artworld's conferral of status suffices to define art, conceptual art's revisionary nature is absorbed by the definition rather than defeating it.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reason against 2 of 2

?

1.Wittgenstein's family resemblance framework shows that open-textured concepts can function reliably without necessary and sufficient conditions.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.The difficulty of defining art under conceptual challenges reflects normal concept elasticity, not a principled impossibility of general definition.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

Next step

Based on where you are in your exploration

Strongest counterpoint

Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

Topics

Related

Conceptual art is profoundly revisionary and difficult to classify If the artworld's conferral of status suffices to define art, conceptual art's r...Proceduralist definitions (Dickie's Institutional Theory) classify art by relati...The advent of conceptual art challenges any attempt at a general definition of a...

+2 moreShow less

The difficulty of defining art under conceptual challenges reflects normal conce...Wittgenstein's family resemblance framework shows that open-textured concepts ca...

Similar

The advent of conceptual art challenges any attempt at a general defin...84%A perfectly good explanation of such phenomena can be provided in acco...84%A definition of art that includes natural objects and persons as art l...83%The aesthetic definition of art faces serious counterexamples from nat...83%

Source

AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid

SEP: conceptual-art

View source passageHide passage

There have been no shortages of attempts to define art in this manner. Most prominently perhaps, it has been suggested that art ought to be defined in terms of its aesthetic character, so that, roughly, x is an artwork if and only if x gives rise to an aesthetic experience (e.g., Beardsley 1958). Notwithstanding the difficulties that this particular suggestion entails (we shall return to this in §3.3), the advent of a kind of art that is as profoundly revisionary and difficult to classify as con

Extraction notes

Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 3 (1 for, 2 against)
Edits: 1 edit