Hi Derek,

Speculations are arising from any approach to the issue. Just some of them can be substantiated by evolutionary continuity, not egoistically anthropocentric, contempocentric or with no hidden desire to advocate the possession of extra natural ability of “feelings of beauty” or another sort of mystery.

Notions like “time is changing perception of Art” or “time is changing perception of Science” well fit to postmodernist's philosophy and serve the general plea to revise (or deconstruct) old concepts, but with no proposals for sensible answers. 

We all know that social demands are changing. There are changing with development of cultural tendencies. Aesthetics, Ethic and Moral as Culture itself are morphogenious in time and place. 

Art is non-verbal language. Culturally absorbed and well utilised rudiment of pre-speech interactions. Art with no component of communication (i.e. with no “text”, message) is less attractive then odious Black Square or is not Art.

What is Art from your perspective? Hope, it is easier to define then the purpose of it.

VB