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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The appearance of coatracks, old shoes, broken sticks, and similar objects in museums does not show that 'art' in the primary sense is wrongly defined in terms of artifactuality and aesthetic intention.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Duchamp's Fountain was accepted into the institutional art world through the same mechanisms that confer art status on traditionally crafted objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If institutional recognition suffices to make Fountain art, then artifactuality and aesthetic intention are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions for art status.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A definition that excludes paradigm cases accepted by the art world's own gatekeepers fails as an extensionally adequate account of 'art'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The distinction between 'primary' and 'secondary' senses of 'art' is itself a theoretical stipulation designed to protect the definition from counterexamples.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Privileging one sense as 'primary' without independent justification renders the definition unfalsifiable by exempting inconvenient cases from its scope.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A perfectly good explanation of such phenomena can be provided in accord with a relatively traditional definition of art.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Museums display such objects for reasons other than those objects being art in the primary sense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The fact that critics and historians call such objects 'works of art' may reflect secondary or derivative senses of the term, not the primary sense.
      ?

      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.