Art Concept Pluralism

Metaphilosophy 42 (1-2):83-97 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Abstract: There is a long tradition of trying to analyze art either by providing a definition (essentialism) or by tracing its contours as an indefinable, open concept (anti-essentialism). Both art essentialists and art anti-essentialists share an implicit assumption of art concept monism. This article argues that this assumption is a mistake. Species concept pluralism—a well-explored position in philosophy of biology—provides a model for art concept pluralism. The article explores the conditions under which concept pluralism is appropriate, and argues that they obtain for art. Art concept pluralism allows us to recognize that different art concepts are useful for different purposes, and what has been feuding definitions can be seen as characterizations of specific art concepts

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-12-03

Downloads
690 (#43,694)

6 months
133 (#48,058)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

P. D. Magnus
State University of New York, Albany
Christy Mag Uidhir
University of Houston

Citations of this work

In defense of the metaphysics of race.Adam Hochman - 2017 - Philosophical Studies 174 (11):2709–2729.
Conceptual fragmentation and the rise of eliminativism.Henry Taylor & Peter Vickers - 2017 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 7 (1):17-40.
The definition of art.Thomas Adajian - 2018 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong.Jerry A. Fodor - 1998 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Categories and Concepts.Edward E. Smith & L. Douglas - 1981 - Harvard University Press.
From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defence of Conceptual Analysis.Frank Jackson - 1999 - Philosophical Quarterly 49 (197):539-542.

View all 51 references / Add more references