Since the second half of the twentieth century, the influential concept of aesthetic experience has been strongly criticized by powerful voices both in analytic philosophy and in continental theory, sometimes to the point of rejecting its significance for art or even to denying its very existence. Nonetheless, it stubbornly reasserts itself as central to understanding art's meaning and value. Philosophical critique of aesthetic experience takes multiple forms. Theorists seeking a definition of art generally reject aesthetic experience as inadequate for this (...) task because it is both too wide and too narrow. Aesthetic experience surely occurs beyond the limits of art, as in our encounter with natural beauty, but it... (shrink)

I identify two mutually exclusive notions of formalism in Kant’s Critique of Aesthetic Judgement: a thin concept of aesthetic formalism and a thick concept of aesthetic formalism. Arguably there is textual support for both concepts in Kant’s third critique. I offer interpretations of three key elements in the Critique of Aesthetic Judgement which support a thick formalism. The three key elements are: Harmony of the Faculties, Aesthetic Ideas and Sensus Communis. I interpret these concepts in relation to the conditions for (...) theoretical Reason, the conditions for moral motivation and the conditions for intersubjectivity, respectively. I conclude that there is no support for a thin concept of aesthetic formalism when the key elements of Kant’s Critique of Aesthetic Judgement are understood in the context of his broader critical aims. (shrink)

Most modern definitions of art fail to successfully address the issue of the ever-changing nature of art, and rarely even attempt to provide an account that would be valid in more than just the modern Western context. This article develops a new theory that preserves the advantages of its predecessors, solves or avoids their problems, and has a scope wide enough to account for art of different times and cultures. It argues that an object is art in a given context (...) iff some person culturally competent in this context have afforded it the status of a candidate for appreciation for reasons considered good in this context. This weakly institutional view is supplemented by auxiliary definitions explaining the notions of cultural contexts, competence, and good reasons for affording the status. The relativisation to contexts brings increased explanatory power and scope, and the ability to account for the diversity of art. (shrink)

What explanation can be given for the relevance of literature to Bourdieu's theoretical work? In order to explain this choice of object, in the first part of this article I consider the national and international context within which Bourdieu's theory has been built. In the French intellectual space literature was a central theoretical object. In the international context, the attention paid to literature was justified by the importance given to the symbolic phenomena in the main contemporary theoretical traditions. In order (...) to appreciate the singularity and difficulty of Bourdieu's theoretical acquisition, I try to reconstruct the problems that he attempted to resolve, the theoretical possibilities with regard to which his hypotheses were defined, and the position that he held in his field of production at the time in which they were formulated. In Bourdieu's thought, this conjunctural dimension does not imply that a theory is particularized or relativized. So he presented his theoretical frameworks on literature as a model applying to any kind of cultural products. In the second part of my paper I intend to test these claims by examining under what conditions and to what extent his `Principles of a science of works' have been considerd transposable to other national contexts and/or to new objects. (shrink)

V pričujočem prispevku bom kritično presodil dva splošno sprejeta pristopa k umetnosti in estetiki, ki nakazujeta, da filozofska estetika ni več mogoča. Tako sociologija umetnosti kot tudi številni poststrukturalistični pristopi k umetnosti trdijo, da so pokazali, da sta tradicionalna umetnostna zgodovina in filozofija umetnosti nelegitimni. Sociologija umetnosti in poststrukturalistična teorija sta obe prišli - po povsem različnih poteh -do podobnega sklepa: estetika je v osnovi ideološki diskurz, ki mora biti demaskiran. Poskušal bom pokazati, da Bourdieujev pristop - čeprav razjasni nekatere (...) aspekte umetnostne presoje -resno napačno razlaga naravo sodobne filozofske estetike. Zdi se mi, da so mnogi poststrukturalistični misleci zagrešili isto napako, kot jo je Bourdieu: nagnjeni so k temu, da tradicionalno umetnostno in literarno zgodovino itd. razumejo kot neizpodbitno »logocentrično« in »esencialistično«. To je tako, kot da bi hoteli povedati, da mrrabiti vsaka, svojega imena vredna estetika esencialistična, nezgodovinska in zatorej ideološka. Trdim, daje koncept umetnosti, kot ga mi poznamo in ki seje izoblikoval v sedanjo obliko konec 18. stoletja, zgodovinski koncept. Umetnost, kot jo mi poznamo, ni večna, čeprav presega naše življenje. To pa ne pomeni, da umetniškega vzgiba, kije soroden simbolnemu in kije lahko uresničen na mnogo načinov v različnih zgodovinskih in kulturnih pogojih, ne moremo legitimno obravnavati kot stalno odliko človeške narave. Človek ni samo zoon politikon, temveč tudi zoon symbolikon. Estetika je med drugim racionalni odraz naše potrebe po simbolih ter naše zmožnosti simbolizacije. (shrink)

Similarity and difference, patterns of variation, consistency and coherence: these are the reference points of the philosopher. Understanding experience, exploring ideas through particular instantiations, novel and innovative thinking: these are the reference points of the artist. However, at certain points in the proceedings of our Symposium titled, Next to Nothing: Art as Performance, this characterisation of philosopher and artist respectively might have been construed the other way around. The commentator/philosophers referenced their philosophical interests through the particular examples/instantiations created by the (...) artist and in virtue of which they were then able to engage with novel and innovative thinking. From the artists’ presentations, on the other hand, emerged a series of contrasts within which philosophical and artistic ideas resonated. This interface of philosopher-artist bore witness to the fact that just as art approaches philosophy in providing its own analysis, philosophy approaches art in being a co-creator of art’s meaning. In what follows, we discuss the conception of philosophy-art that emerged from the Symposium, and the methodological minimalism which we employed in order to achieve it. We conclude by drawing out an implication of the Symposium’s achievement which is that a counterpoint to Institutional theories of art may well be the point from which future directions will take hold, if philosophy-art gains traction. (shrink)