Graduate studies at Western
British Journal of Aesthetics 43 (4):379-385 (2003)
|Abstract||The cluster account of art is a purportedly non-definitional account of art, inspired by Wittgenstein's notion of family resemblance, and recently defended by Berys Gaut. Gaut does not provide good reasons to think that art is not definable, and his approach to possible counterexamples to the cluster account would, applied consistently, preclude this. The cluster account's theory of error, its resources for accounting for borderline cases, and its heuristic usefulness are not impressive. Reasons strong enough to warrant accepting the cluster account, it is concluded, have not been given|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Eric Chwang (2012). Cluster Randomization and Political Philosophy. Bioethics 26 (9):476-484.
William C. Frederick (1995). The Technological Value Cluster (Value Cluster IV). The Ruffin Series in Business Ethics:200-204.
Nöel Carroll (2012). Art in an Expanded Field: Wittgenstein and Aesthetics. Nordic Journal of Aesthetics 42 (42):14-31.
Derek Matravers (2007). Institutional Definitions and Reasons. British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (3):251-257.
A. Neill & A. Ridley (2012). Relational Theories of Art: The History of an Error. British Journal of Aesthetics 52 (2):141-151.
Francis Longworth & Andrea Scarantino (2010). The Disjunctive Theory of Art: The Cluster Account Reformulated. British Journal of Aesthetics 50 (2):151-167.
Stephen Davies (2004). The Cluster Theory of Art. British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (3):297-300.
Berys Gaut (2005). The Cluster Account of Art Defended. British Journal of Aesthetics 45 (3):273-288.
Aaron Meskin (2007). The Cluster Account of Art Reconsidered. British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (4):388-400.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads79 ( #12,257 of 739,542 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,287 of 739,542 )
How can I increase my downloads?