Estetika 53 (2):165-183 (2016)

Authors
Annelies Monseré
University of Ghent
Abstract
In this article, I argue against Dominic McIver Lopes’s claim that nobody needs a theory of art. On the one hand, I will demonstrate that Lopes’s alternative to theories of art – namely, the buck-passing theory of art – is neither more viable nor more fruitful: it is likewise incapable of resolving disagreement over the status of certain artefacts and of being fruitful for the broader field of the arts. On the other hand, I will defend the view that we are in need of a viable theory of art. The concept of art has a profound impact on our cultural practices. Concepts of art in use now showcase biased and arbitrary features. Correspondingly, certain artefacts and practices are excluded from the domain of art without adequate justification. Therefore, I will argue, it is unwarranted to abandon the search for a viable theory of art.
Keywords theory of art  art  art  aesthetics  Lopes D
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
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: 53,666
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Dual Character Art Concepts.Shen‐yi Liao, Aaron Meskin & Joshua Knobe - 2020 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 101 (1):102-128.
.Rogério Lopes - 2013 - Kriterion: Journal of Philosophy 54 (128):281-285.
Defining Art Historically.Jerrold Levinson - 1979 - British Journal of Aesthetics 19 (3):21-33.
Art: What It Is and Why It Matters.Catharine Abell - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (3):671-691.
The Transfiguration of the Commonplace.Arthur C. Danto - 1974 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 33 (2):139-148.

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Buck Passing Theory of Art.James O. Young - 2016 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 3 (4): 421-433.
Equality, Fairness, and Responsibility in an Unequal World.Thom Brooks - 2014 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 1 (2):147-153.
Beyond Art.Dominic McIver Lopes - 2014 - Oxford University Press.
Reasons and Value – in Defence of the Buck-Passing Account.Jussi Suikkanen - 2005 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (5):513 - 535.
Neoliberal Noise: Attali, Foucault, & the Biopolitics of Uncool.Robin James - 2014 - Culture, Theory, and Critique 52 (2):138-158.
What is Interactivity?Aaron Smuts - 2009 - Journal of Aesthetic Education 43 (4):pp. 53-73.
The Theory of (Exclusively) Local Beables.Travis Norsen - 2010 - Foundations of Physics 40 (12):1858-1884.
Nobody Needs a Theory of Art.Dominic McIver Lopes - 2008 - Journal of Philosophy 105 (3):109-127.
The Second Person in the Theory of Mind Debate.Monika Dullstein - 2012 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 3 (2):231-248.
A Deflationary Response to the Ontological Problem.Jennifer Lynn Faust - 1995 - Dissertation, University of Illinois at Chicago

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-11-12

Total views
32 ( #308,498 of 2,349,170 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #186,904 of 2,349,170 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes