DA,
Thanks for your comment. I've not been able to do much threading as I've been in school. I like what you wrote towards the end of your post (2-15-10): "We need to be prepared to question all propositions (eg that art = beauty;...)." As I was collaborating on an art project with a fellow artist last week I was considering what it was I was doing exactly. (We were making assemblages out of garbage.) If I had to describe the project further, only materials, processes, and our intended scope could be mentioned. Philosophically, when faced by art, I am really at a lack for any substantive propositions: the work cannot be axiomatized. Of course, I could tell you about its social and political ramifications, the work's tactility, design, color schema, etc. But I don't think it's possible to put the philosophy of art into words. Maybe "philosophy of art" doesn't make sense?