Philosophical Studies 155 (2):289-305 (2011)
|Abstract||I develop and defend the following functional view of art: a work of art typically possesses as an essential feature one or more points, purposes, or ends with reference to the satisfaction of which that work can be appropriately evaluated. This way of seeing a work’s artistic value as dependent on its particular artistic ends (whatever they may be) suggests an answer to a longstanding question of what sort of internal relation, if any, exists between the wide variety of values (moral, cognitive, aesthetic, etc.) that may be possessed by works of art and their value qua works of art|
|Keywords||Ethical Criticism Genre|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
David Davies (2009). Works and Performances in the Performing Arts. Philosophy Compass 4 (5):744-755.
Henry John Pratt (2012). Artistic Institutions, Valuable Experiences: Coming to Terms with Artistic Value. Philosophia 40 (3):591-606.
Robert Stecker (2008). Immoralism and the Anti-Theoretical View. British Journal of Aesthetics 48 (2):145-161.
James Shelley (2002). The Character and Role of Principles in the Evaluation of Art. British Journal of Aesthetics 42 (1):37-51.
Paul Crowther (2007). Defining Art, Creating the Canon: Artistic Value in an Era of Doubt. Oxford University Press.
Rob van Gerwen (2004). Ethical Autonomism. The Work of Art as a Moral Agent. Contemporary Aesthetics 2.
Dominic McIver Lopes (2011). The Myth of (Non-Aesthetic) Artistic Value. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (244):518-536.
Roman Dykast (2010). Otakar Zich: Aesthetic and Artistic Evaluation, Parts 2 & 3. Estetika 47 (1):71-95.
Added to index2010-06-09
Total downloads43 ( #26,146 of 549,070 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,703 of 549,070 )
How can I increase my downloads?