L6 - Art & Morality Flashcards
Explain what is claimed about the relation between art and ethics by radical autonomism / radical moralism / moderate autonomism / moderate moralism
Radical moralism states that there is a direct correlation between ethics and aesthetics. They are putting ethical value and aesthetic value on one level. According to this view, artworks are only aesthetically good when they are ethically good. If there is no promotion of ethical values or promotion of unethical acts, the artwork is bad.
Radical autonomism states that aesthetics and ethics are independent realms. It is never appropriate to evaluate art along ethical dimensions. Aesthetic judgement should only take into account aesthetic (formal) features. Ethical criticism of art is a category mistake (e.g. saying that my height is 60km/h). Aesthetics is its realm or category. Compatible with anti-intentionalist theories (Formal features decide the work’s meaning, moral context does not matter – Author is dead, author’s (im)morality does not matter)
Moderate moralism states that there is an overlap between the aesthetic and the ethical realm. Art is good art when it promotes moral values and bad art when it promotes immorality. Moral evaluation only matters to aesthetic evaluation when it is relevant (e.g. not abstract art) Immorality counts against aesthetic merit, but it does not completely outweigh all other aesthetic considerations.
Moderate autonomism states that ethics and aesthetics are independent, you can judge an artwork morally, but that will not affect aesthetic judgement. It can explain why sometimes morally bad art is aesthetically good art.
Give an example of an immoral artwork and explain why you believe it is (or in what sense it could be) immoral.
An example of this is the artwork “Unplugged” where blenders are plugged in (in the original installation), with goldfish inside them. I believe this is an immoral artwork as it compromises fish in the blenders and leaves them to the fate of others, taking away their autonomy and possibly leaving killing them.
Does the immorality of this work bear on your aesthetic judgement of it? Explain why (not) and explicitly state which theory about the relation between art and ethics you are following here (radical autonomism / radical moralism / moderate autonomism / moderate moralism).
The immorality of this artwork bears very much on my aesthetic judgement in this case. In this case I would argue that there is a direct correlation between the immorality of the work and it’s aesthetics, supporting radical moralism. In a sense it is almost inviting the viewer to push the on button, motivating immoral behavior which in this case it lower the aesthetic value of the piece.
Use an example of an interpretation of a specific artwork to explain why radical autonomism / radical moralism might be too radical a position about the relation between aesthetic and moral evaluation.
Consider the film “Schindler’s List,” directed by Steven Spielberg. The film tells the true story of Oskar Schindler, a German businessman who saved the lives of more than a thousand Polish Jews during the Holocaust. The film is known for its powerful portrayal of the atrocities of the Holocaust and the moral dilemma faced by individuals in the face of such evil.
Applying radical autonomism might involve evaluating the film solely on its cinematic merits—its direction, cinematography, and narrative structure—without taking into account its moral or historical context. Radical autonomism could argue that the film’s aesthetic qualities should be assessed independently of its moral subject matter.
On the other hand, radical moralism might insist that the sole value of “Schindler’s List” lies in its moral message, emphasizing the importance of documenting historical atrocities and promoting moral reflection. According to this extreme position, the film’s artistic elements are secondary to its moral function.
However, both radical autonomism and radical moralism seem inadequate when applied to “Schindler’s List.” The film’s artistic excellence, including its powerful storytelling, cinematography, and emotional impact, is inseparable from its moral significance. The film’s moral weight and historical importance enhance its artistic value, creating a complex interplay between aesthetics and ethics. Rejecting the extremes, a balanced perspective acknowledges that in certain artworks, like “Schindler’s List,” aesthetic and moral dimensions are intricately connected, and a comprehensive evaluation must consider both aspects.
