Essentialism and the Definition of ‘Art’

Diffey, T. J.

doi:10.1093/bjaesthetics/13.2.103

Cited by 18 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, even if one is interested in an essence of X it does not follow that he is interested in a definition of X as well. The idea of a distinction between definition and essence goes back to Hume (Diffey 1973).…”

Section: Bradley's Organicismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…closed concept of art (or some sub-concepts of art) does not preclude artistic novelty and creativity (Margolis 1958, Mandelbaum 1965, Dickie 1971:98-108, Sclafani 1971, Diffey 1973, Kamber 1998.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some aestheticians have tried to do justice to the traditional theories by suggesting that aesthetic theories were not attempting to offer essentialist definitions of art (Brown 1971, Bywater 1972, Diffey 1973, Snoeyenbos 1978, Matthews 1979, Tilghman 1989). Considering such thinkers as Bosanquet, Hume, Kant, Collingwood, T. M. Greene, Dewey, Herbert Read and Thomas Munro, they came to a conclusion that discussions of art occur in response to a variety of questions, for instance, the elucidation of the current concept of art, the justification and re-evaluation of art, and the ranking of the arts in a hierarchy of importance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Doing Justice to Traditional Aesthetic Theories: Weitz Reconsidered

Volt¹

2002

TRAMES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the very first lines of his famous article -'The Role of Theory is Aesthetics' -Morris Weitz tells us that each of the great art theories (Emotionalism, Voluntarism, Formalism, Intuitionism, Organicism) converges in a logically vain attempt to provide the defining properties of art. He tries to examine some of the aesthetic theories in order to see if they include adequate statements about the nature of art. But instead of giving us exact descriptions of these theories, he provided us with only a very scant summary. Thus, even if Weitz were correct in thinking that all theories converged in an essential definition of art, he does not provide any further arguments for his conviction. Some aestheticians (Diffey, Tilghman, Matthews, Snoeyenbos) have tried to do justice to the traditional theories by suggesting that aesthetic theories were not attempting to offer essentialist definitions of art. Unfortunately, those critics left untouched the aesthetic theories offered by Weitz. Therefore, in order to evaluate (1) Weitz's account of aesthetic theories and (2) to see if the criticisms concerning his account strike home, it is necessary to consider just theories mentioned by Weitz.My paper confirms a view that within aesthetic theories a variety of purposes can be recognised. For instance, the explanation and re-evaluation of art, and the completion of metaphysical system. I. Weitz and his criticsThe famous article of Morris Weitz (1968) -'The Role of Theory in Aesthetics' -has raised many objections since it was published. 1 Perhaps the chief objection is that Weitz did not take into account the possibility that art can be defined in terms of non-manifest properties. The second objection is that 'family resemblance' fails as a means for the identification of art. The third is that 'art' can be an open concept in two or three different ways. The final objection that is commonly heard is that a 1 Actually, Weitz' paper has been frequently anthologised.

show abstract

Section: Bradley's Organicismmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Doing Justice to Traditional Aesthetic Theories: Weitz Reconsidered

Volt¹

2002

TRAMES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Margaret Macdonald on the definition of art

Whiting

2022

British Journal for the History of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works

Goehr¹

1994

214

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the difference between a performance of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony and the symphony itself? What does it mean for musicians to be faithful to the works they perform? To answer such questions, Lydia Goehr combines philosophical and historical methods of enquiry. Finding Anglo‐American philosophy inadequate for the task, she shows that a historical perspective is indispensable to a full understanding of musical ontology. Goehr examines the concepts and assumptions behind the practice of classical music in the nineteenth century and demonstrates how different they were from those of previous centuries. She rejects the finding that the concept of a musical work emerged in the sixteenth century, placing its emergence instead around 1800. She describes how the concept of a work then came to define the norms, expectations, and behaviour that we now associate with classical music. Out of the historical thesis, Goehr draws conclusions about the normative functions of concepts and ideals. She also addresses current debates amongst conductors, early‐music performers, and avant‐gardists.

show abstract

Essentialism and the Definition of ‘Art’

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Doing Justice to Traditional Aesthetic Theories: Weitz Reconsidered

Doing Justice to Traditional Aesthetic Theories: Weitz Reconsidered

Margaret Macdonald on the definition of art

The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About