Intentions: Conversations and art
British Journal of Aesthetics 46 (1):70-81 (2006)
| Abstract | This paper is a continuation of a debate between Noël Carroll, who defends intentionalism, and Kent Wilson and myself, who argue that the intentions of artists are not relevant to the interpretation of works of art. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJerrold Levinson (2007). Review: Artful Intentions: Paisley Livingston, Art and Intention: A Philosophical Study. [REVIEW] Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 65 (3):299 - 305.
Bruno Verbeek (ed.) (2007). Reasons and Intentions. Ashgate Pub. Ltd..
Alfred R. Mele (2008). Proximal Intentions, Intention-Reports, and Vetoing. Philosophical Psychology 21 (1):1 – 14.
K. E. Gover (2012). What is Humpty-Dumptyism in Contemporary Visual Art? A Reply to Maes. British Journal of Aesthetics 52 (2):169-181.
Raimo Tuomela (2000). Collective and Joint Intention. Mind and Society 1 (2):39-69.
Paisley Livingston (2005). Art and Intention: A Philosophical Study. Oxford University Press.
Stephen Davies (2006). Authors' Intentions, Literary Interpretation, and Literary Value. British Journal of Aesthetics 46 (3):223-247.
Jukka Mikkonen (2009). Intentions and Interpretations: Philosophical Fiction as Conversation. Contemporary Aesthetics 7.
James A. E. Macpherson (2010). Legislative Intentionalism and Proxy Agency. Law and Philosophy 29 (1):1-29.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads43 ( #26,086 of 548,972 )Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,091 of 548,972 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
