British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (3):280-297 (2007)

Daniel A. Kaufman
Missouri State University
Peter Kivy has maintained that the Wittgensteinian account of ‘art’ ‘is not a going concern’ and that ‘the traditional task of defining the work of art is back in fashion, with a vengeance’. This is true, in large part, because of the turn towards relational definitions of ‘art’ taken by philosophers in the 1960s; a move that is widely believed to have countered the Wittgensteinian charge that ‘art’ is an open concept and which gave rise to a ‘New Wave’ in aesthetic theorizing. So successful has this New Wave been that today the philosophy of art is awash with relational definitions, which are increasingly characterized by their technical sophistication and logical complexity. The aim of this essay is to oppose this trend; to demonstrate that relationalist definitions cannot avoid the problems which provided the impetus for the Wittgensteinian view and to show that the New Wavers cannot explain why anyone would want the definitions which they are offering, irrespective of their success or failure. I will also explore, in detail, the uses, as well as the limitations, of the Wittgensteinian approach to the concept of art.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/aesthj/aym008
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,784
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Music, Neuroscience, and the Psychology of Wellbeing: A Précis.Adam M. Croom - 2012 - Frontiers in Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 2 (393):393.
Another Artworld is Possible.Filippo Focosi - 2016 - Rivista di Estetica 61:85-98.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Relational Theories of Art: The History of an Error.A. Neill & A. Ridley - 2012 - British Journal of Aesthetics 52 (2):141-151.
Conceptual Art Is Not What It Seems.Dominic McIver Lopes - 2007 - In Peter Goldie & Elisabeth Schellekens (eds.), Philosophy and Conceptual Art. Oxford University Press.
Family Resemblances and the Classification of Works of Art.Haig Khatchadourian - 1969 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 28 (1):79-90.
The Meaning of the Word Art: A Neothomistic Investigation.Michael Storck - 2010 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 84:263-273.
Kaufman on Art, Family Resemblances, and Wittgenstein.Ben Tilghman - 2008 - British Journal of Aesthetics 48 (1):86-88.


Added to PP index

Total views
60 ( #182,426 of 2,462,977 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,363 of 2,462,977 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes