British Journal of Aesthetics 48 (1):86-88 (2008)
AbstractKaufman describes the current debate on the possibility of a definition of art between the theorists and the anti-theorist Wittgensteinians. The Wittgensteinian reliance on ‘family resemblances’ is a serious objection to theoretical definitions. Wittgenstein, however, is said to be unable to give a proper account of the ‘inner experience’ encountered in art. By way of response, it is urged that attention to Wittgenstein himself will show that there are misunderstandings of the idea of family resemblances and that Wittgenstein's writings provide all we need to understand the depth of ‘inner experience’.
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.
Family resemblances, relationalism, and the meaning of 'art'.Daniel A. Kaufman - 2007 - British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (3):280-297.
Wittgenstein, Universals and Family Resemblances.Nicholas Griffin - 1974 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 3 (4):635 - 651.
Family resemblances and rule-governed behavior.Douglas Huff - 1981 - Philosophical Investigations 4 (3):1-23.
The family resemblances argument and definitions of art.Olaf Tollefsen - 1976 - Metaphilosophy 7 (3-4):206-216.
Family resemblances and the classification of works of art.Haig Khatchadourian - 1969 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 28 (1):79-90.
Resemblances of identity: Ludwig Wittgenstein and contemporary feminist legal theory.Vanessa E. Munro - 2006 - Res Publica 12 (2):137-162.
Art in an Expanded Field: Wittgenstein and Aesthetics.Nöel Carroll - 2012 - Nordic Journal of Aesthetics 23 (42):14-31.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Music, neuroscience, and the psychology of wellbeing: A précis.Adam M. Croom - 2012 - Frontiers in Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 2 (393):393.
References found in this work
No references found.