Nature of Art Flashcards
What are the arguments in regards to how we should define art? (For, Objections, Rebuttal, Alternative, Objections, Alternative, Objections)
- Beardsley
- Too narrow/broad
- Primary intention
- Levinson
- Circular
- Gaut
- Answer the question
What is your line of argument in regards to how we should define art? (Three points)
- All the theories have valid downsides when considered alone.
- However, Gaut provides us with the framework to construct a culmination definition.
- Combining all three account of art would result in a much stronger definition.
What is Beardsley’s definition of art? (Three points)
- A functionalist definition.
- Art is something that causes a detatched exhilirating experience.
- It explains why we value art, because we value the aesthetic experience.
What are the benefits of Beardsley’s definition of art? (Two benefits)
- It appeals to the aesthetic experience which is normally neglected.
- Explains why we value art.
What are the objections to Beardsley’s definition of art? (Three points)
- Does it capture all the experiences we get from art?
- It doesn’t capture much of what we consider art.
- It captures things that we wouldnt consider art.
What things does Beardsley’s definition not capture that we would consider as art?
Certain avant-garde works
What does Beardsley’s definition capture that we wouldn’t normally consider as art?
Clothes or cars.
What is a potential response to the objections for Beardsley in regards to the definition of art?
Perhaps aesthetic experinece is not all the definition but a primary intention of the work.
What is the issue with making aesthetic experience the primary intention of a work?
What about overly political art?
What is Levinson’s defintion of art? (Two points)
- A relational account of art.
- An object is art if its intention is to be regarded as art.
How do revelutionary works fit into Levinson’s definition of art?
They are made to be in contrast with previous works.
What are the benefits of Levinson’s definition of art?
It makes sense of why we seem to view art in the art-historical context.
What is the objection to Levinson’s defintion? (Two points)
- It seems circular to define art in terms of art.
- What about the first pieces of art?
What is Gaut’s definition of art? (Three points)
- He does not provide a definitive defintion, but rather a formula to do so.
- He provides the cluster concept.
- It does justice to the varieties of art.
What is the cluster concept? (Three points)
- A set of criteria which are jointly sufficient.
- A certain subset would fulfilled would be considered art.
- They are disjunctively necessary, you cannot lack all conditions.
What is the benefit of the cluster concept? (Two points)
- It is able to account for the variety of art.
- It allows us to combine the other theories.
What are the objections to the cluster concept? (Two points)
- What set of criteria and which subset is sufficient?
- Doesn’t answer the question.
What are the arguments regarding how we should understand non-representational forms of art? (For, Objections, Alternative, Objections)
- Robinson
- Limited
- Robison
- Were the Romantics right?
What is you line of argument in regards to how non-representational forms of art should be understood? (Two points)
- The resemblance theory is clearly flawed.
- The persona theory is more convincing especially is we personify the peice of music into being the one expressing the emotion.
What is Robinson’s resemblance theory? (Two points)
- We tend to attribute expressive qualities to things that are not expressive.
- Music can mimic tones of voice that we associate with certiain expressions.
What are the objections to Robinson’s resemblance theory? (Two points)
- Emotions like hope would not be able to be expressed through music.
- Sometimes music doesn’t mimic voice.
What is Robinson’s persona theory? (Three points)
- It expresses the artist’s state of mind.
- Originated from the Romantics.
- It could also be the state of mind of a persona that the artist created.
How is instrumental music expressive according to Robinson’s persona theory? (Two points)
- It could be hinted at by the title of the music.
- By how the composer thought of the composition
What are the objections to Robinson’s persona theory? (Three points)
- Were the Romantics right to think this way?
- Seems reasonable that music expresses without it being an individual’s emotions.
- Personas are metaphysically dubious.
What are the arguments regarding imagination and fiction? (For, Against)
- Walton
- Friend
What is your line of argument in regards to imagination and fiction? (Two points)
- Walton’s theory is shown to be flawed by Friend.
- Perhaps we should focus on intention rather than imagination.
What is Walton’s argument in regards to imagination and fiction? (Three points)
- Fictional works are props for a particular imaginative activity.
- Not all imagining is deliberative, occupant, and solitary.
- From this use of imagination we can distinguish between fictions and non-fictions.
What do the imagining props do? (Two points)
- Prescribe imaginings
- Generate fictional truths
What is the difference between deliberative and spontanious imagining according to Walton? (Two points)
- Deliberative imagining is when I am in control, whereas spontainous is not.
- Spontainous seems more vivid and lifelike.
In what way are imaginings not solitary?
We can share imaginations, like children playing imaginary games.
What does Friend do in response to Walton’s use of imagination to distinguish between fiction and non-fiction?
- Tries to distinguish fiction and non-fiction from what Walton said in order to show that it does not work.
In what way can fictions and non-fictions not be distinguished with imagination according to Friend? (Three points)
- Both can prompt particularly vivid imagery.
- They both prompt beliefs and imagination.
- Both have ‘mere-make-belief’ and straightforward assertions.
In what way does non-fiction constitute of ‘mere-make-belief’?
Take accounts of historical battles which did not happen or philosophical dialogues.
In what way does fiction contitute of straightforward assertions?
There are times in which fictional writers simply asserts something which is meant to be believed truly.
