In the contemporary literature, the most authoritative on the definition of art is the institutional theory that emerged as a response to the radicalizations in modern art associated with ready-made, pop art, conceptualism and other movements. In familiar versions of institutional theory, the participants in the so-called “artworld” (Arthur Danto's term) are enumerated “rhapsodically”, to use Kant's famous expression. In this context, the article is an attempt to “deduce the categories” by which art is defined, using the categorizing positions of (...) the participants in this “artworld”. In order to justify the approach and to relate the problematic to traditional philosophical issues, a brief overview of the “doctrine of categories” (Kategorienlehre) is given. (shrink)

If we take a bird’s-eye view of the history of philosophical ideas and try to assess the place the problems of modality hold in it, it is likely that we will gain the impression that they are not among the priorities of philosophical thinking of the essence of human being. A closer look at some classical theses, however, can provide us with different answers. In § 76 of Critique of Judgement, which is actually “just” a comment on the basic text, (...) Kant explains that “For human reason it is of absolute necessity to distinguish between the possibility and reality of things”. Kant helps us to include modality in the very metaphysical definition of the human being. That is why we can say: human being is a modal being before being “a rational being”, “a social animal” or “homo faber”. In my opinion that “before” should be understood in a strictly metaphysical sense and it should help us to discover a non-trivial basis and principle of philosophical anthropology. It is my thesis that philosophical anthropology should place modality in the very definition of human nature and consider human being as a possibilia entis. We could illustrate the fundamental character of modality by demonstrating that modality is at the basis of constituting time as temporality. In view of this position only the modal being has a time in the sense of temporality. Or, to put it in a different way, we can see in nature only changes, but not temporal phenomena in the strict sense of the concept of time perceived as temporality. (shrink)