Abstract
What is the definition of art? Not too long ago, this might have been properly said to be the central issue in philosophical aesthetics. Not anymore.1 But philosophers of art are unlikely to give up on the pursuit of definition that easily. Most of us have invested far too much time and energy learning how to go about the game of definition and counterexample to simply let it go just like that. Might there not be some other questions of definition that could structure the field in this new century? What, after all, is a comic book? Or a film? Or a poem? Or a dance? Perhaps if we pursued definitions of the individual arts or art forms we might get somewhere. In this essay, I shall offer some sceptical thoughts about that pursuit—sceptical thoughts inspired by the paper that inadvertently triggered interest for more than five decades in the definition of art, namely, Morris Weitz’s ‘The Role of Theory in Aesthetics’.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Adajian, T. 2005. ‘On the Prototype Theory of Concepts and the Definition of Art’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 63: 231–236.
Anderson, J. 2000. ‘Aesthetic Concepts of Art’ in N. Carroll (ed.), Theories of Art Today, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 65–92.
Beardsley, M. 1982. ‘What is Going on in a Dance?’ Dance Research Journal, 15: 31–37.
Beardsley, M. 1983. ‘An Aesthetic Definition of Art’ in H. Curtler (ed.), What Is Art? New York: Haven, 15–29.
Budd, M. 1995. Values of Art: Pictures, Poetry, and Music, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Carrier, D. 2000. The Aesthetics of Comics, University State Press: Pennsylvania University Park.
Carroll, N. 1985. ‘The Specificity of Media in the Arts’, Journal of Aesthetic Education, 19: 5–20.
Carroll, N. 1988. ‘Art, Practice, and Narrative’, Monist, 71: 140–156.
Carroll, N. 1993. ‘Historical Narratives and the Philosophy of Art’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 51: 313–326.
Carroll, N. 1994. ‘Identifying Art’ in R.J. Yanal (ed.), Institutions of Art, University Park: Pennsylvania University State Press, 3–38.
Carroll, N. 1996. ‘Defining the Moving Image’, Theorizing the Moving Image, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 49–74.
Carroll, N. 1999. Philosophy of Art: A Contemporary Introduction, London and New York: Routledge.
Carroll, N. (ed.) 2000. Theories of Art Today, Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Currie, G. 1989. An Ontology of Art, New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Danto, A. 1981. The Transfiguration of the Commonplace: A Philosophy of Art, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Davies, D. 2004. Art as Performance, Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Davies, S. 2003. ‘Essential Distinctions for Art Theorists’ in S. Davies and A.C. Sukla (eds), Art and Essence, Westport, CT: Praeger, 3–16.
Davies, S. and Sukla, A.C. (eds) 2003. Art and Essence, Westport, CT: Praeger.
Dean, J. 2003. ‘The Nature of Concepts and the Definition of Art’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 61: 29–35.
DePaul, M. R. and Ramsey, W. (eds) 1998. Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and its Role in Philosophical Inquiry, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Dickie, G. 1974. Art and the Aesthetic: An Institutional Analysis, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Dickie, G. 1984. The Art Circle: A Theory of Art, New York: Haven.
Dutton, D. 2006. ‘A Naturalistic Definition of Art’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 64: 367–377.
Eaton, M. 2000. ‘A Sustainable Definition of “Art”’ in N. Carroll (ed.), Theories of Art Today, 141–159.
Fodor, J. 1998. Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong, New York: Oxford University Press.
Gaut, B. 2000. ‘“Art” as a Cluster Concept’ in N. Carroll (ed.), Theories of Art Today, Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 25–44.
Gaut, B. 2005. ‘The Cluster Account of Art Defended’, British Journal of Aesthetics, 45: 273–288.
Hayman, G. and Pratt, H.J. 2005. ‘What Are Comics?’ in D. Goldblatt and L. Brown, (eds), Aesthetics: A Reader in Philosophy of the Arts, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc., 419–424.
Jackson, Frank. 2002. ‘Critical Notice of Knowledge and its Limits by Timothy Williamson’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 80: 516–521.
Kivy, P. 1993. ‘Differences’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 51: 123–132.
Lamarque, P. and Olsen, S. 1994. Truth, Fiction, and Literature, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Laurence, S. and Margolis, E. (eds) 1999. ‘Concepts, and Cognitive Science’, Concepts: Core Readings, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Leddy, T. 1987. ‘Rigid Designation in Defining Art’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 45: 263–272.
Levinson, J. 1979. ‘Defining Art Historically’, British Journal of Aesthetics, 19: 232–250.
Levinson, J. 1989. ‘Refining Art Historically’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 47: 21–33.
Levinson, J. 1990. ‘The Concept of Music’, Music, Art, and Metaphysics: Essays in Philosophical Aesthetics, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Levinson, J. 2002. ‘The Irreducible Historicality of the Concept of Art’, British Journal of Aesthetics, 42: 367–379.
Lopes, D.M. forthcoming. ‘Nobody Needs a Theory of Art’, Journal of Philosophy.
Machery, E. 2005. ‘Concepts are not a Natural Kind’, Philosophy of Science, 72: 444–467.
Mandelbaum, M. 1965. ‘Family Resemblances and Generalizations Concerning the Arts’, American Philosophical Quarterly, 2: 219–228.
Margolis, E. and Laurence, S. 1999. Concepts: Core Readings, Cambridge, MA and London: Bradford Books/MIT Press.
Margolis, E. and Laurence, S. 2006. ‘Concepts’ in E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2006 Edition), URL =http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/ spr2006/entries/concepts/.
Meskin, A. 2007. ‘The Cluster Account of Art Reconsidered’, British Journal of Aesthetics, 47: 388–400.
Meskin, A. 2007. ‘Defining Comics?’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 65: 369–379.
Passmore, J. 1951. ‘The Dreariness of Aesthetics’, Mind, 60: 318–335.
Ponech, T. 2006. ‘The Substance of Cinema’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 64: 187–198.
Putnam, H. 1962. ‘The Analytic and the Synthetic’ in H. Feigl and G. Maxwell (eds), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science III, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 358–397.
Putnam, H. 1975. ‘The Meaning of Meaning’ in K. Gunderson (ed.), Language Mind and Knowledge, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science VII, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 131–193.
Ramsey, W. 1998. ‘Prototypes and Conceptual Analysis’ in M.R. DePaul and W. Ramsey (eds), Rethinking Intuition, 161–177. Originally published in 1992. Topoi, 11: 59–70.
Rey, G. 1985. ‘Concepts and Conceptions: A Reply to Smith, Medin and Rips’, Cognition, 19: 297–303.
Ribeiro, A. 2007. ‘Intending to Repeat: A Definition of Poetry’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 65: 189–201.
Scholz, B.C. 1994. ‘Rescuing the Institutional Theory of Art: Implicit Definitions and Folk Aesthetics’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 52: 309–325.
Stecker, R. 1996. ‘What is Literature?’ Revue Internationale De Philosophie, 50: 681–694.
Stecker, R. 1997. Artworks: Definition, Meaning, Value, University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Stecker, R. 2000. ‘Is it Reasonable to Attempt to Define Art?’ in N. Carroll (ed.), Theories of Art Today, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 45–64.
Stecker, R. 2005. Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art: An Introduction, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Steup, M. 2006. ‘The Analysis of Knowledge’ in E.N. Zalta (ed.) Spring 2006. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/ spr2006/entries/knowledge-analysis/.
Stich, S. 1992. ‘What is a Theory of Mental Representation?’ Mind, 101: 243–261.
Walton, K. 1970. ‘Categories of Art’, The Philosophical Review, 79: 334–367.
Walton, K. 2007. ‘Aesthetics—What? Why? And Wherefore?’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 65: 147–250.
Weitz, M. 1956. ‘The Role of Theory in Aesthetics’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 15: 27–35.
Williamson, T. 2000. Knowledge and Its Limits, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zangwill, N. 2002. ‘Are There Counterexamples to Aesthetic Theories of Art?’ Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 60: 111–118.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2008 Aaron Meskin
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Meskin, A. (2008). From Defining Art to Defining the Individual Arts: The Role of Theory in the Philosophies of Arts. In: Stock, K., Thomson-Jones, K. (eds) New Waves in Aesthetics. New Waves in Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230227453_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230227453_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-230-22047-8
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-22745-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)