Generalization In The Philosophy Of Art

Philosophy 33 (125):147 - 157 (1958)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The author's purpose is to show that the traditional ways of dealing with problems in the subject of art, Namely, Through discovering "(a) what is the common property in all works of art which distinguishes them from things that are not works of art, And (b) what is the common property in all good works of art which distinguishes them from bad or mediocre ones" are unsatisfactory. (staff)

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Mr. J. Kemp and Æsthetic Judgments.Constance I. Smith & J. Kemp - 1959 - Philosophy 34 (128):47 - 49.
The Work of Art and the Postures of the Mind.Kingsley Price - 1959 - Review of Metaphysics 12 (4):540 - 569.
How Can There Be Works Of Art?Michael Morris - 2008 - Postgraduate Journal of Aesthetics 5 (3):1-18.
Are Bad Works of Art 'Works of Art'?Cyril Barrett - 1972 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures 6:182-193.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-10

Downloads
33 (#688,357)

6 months
9 (#495,347)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Margaret Macdonald on the Definition of Art.Daniel Whiting - 2022 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 30 (6):1074-1095.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references