Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/oxford-university-press/the-reality-of-non-aesthetic-artistic-value-387Hjg03b6
References (0)
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Copyright
- © Published by Oxford University Press.
- ISSN
- 0031-8094
- eISSN
- 1467-9213
- DOI
- 10.1111/1467-9213.12026
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
It has become increasingly common for philosophers to make use of the concept of artistic value, and, further, to distinguish artistic value from aesthetic value. In a recent paper, ‘The Myth of (Non‐Aesthetic) Artistic Value’, Dominic Lopes takes issue with this, presenting a kind of corrective to current philosophical practice regarding the use of the concept of artistic value. Here I am concerned to defend current practice against Lopes's attack. I argue that there is some unclarity as to what aspect of this practice Lopes is objecting to, and I distinguish three kinds of objection that he could be read as making. I argue that none of these is adequately supported by Lopes's arguments, and that the corresponding three aspects of current philosophical practice are on firmer footing than Lopes's paper suggests. A new, plausible characterisation of artistic value will emerge from this discussion.
Journal
The Philosophical Quarterly – Oxford University Press
Published: Jul 18, 2013