Search results
Nov 5, 2023 · While art relies on subjective inspiration and emotion, science utilizes objective logic and reason. But it’s not quite so black and white. If you’re short on time, here’s a quick answer to your question: Art and science differ primarily in their methodology and goals.
- Overview
- Distinguishing characteristics
philosophy of art, the study of the nature of art, including concepts such as interpretation, representation and expression, and form. It is closely related to aesthetics, the philosophical study of beauty and taste.
The philosophy of art is distinguished from art criticism, which is concerned with the analysis and evaluation of particular works of art. Critical activity may be primarily historical, as when a lecture is given on the conventions of the Elizabethan theatre in order to explain some of the devices used in William Shakespeare’s plays. It may be primarily analytical, as when a certain passage of poetry is separated into its elements and its meaning or import explained in relation to other passages and other poems in the tradition. Or it may be primarily evaluative, as when reasons are given for saying that the work of art in question is good or bad, or better or worse than another one. Sometimes it is not a single work of art but an entire class of works in a certain style or genre (such as pastoral poems or Baroque music) that is being elucidated, and sometimes it is the art of an entire period (such as Romantic). But in every case, the aim of art criticism is to achieve an increased understanding or enjoyment of the work (or classes of works) of art, and its statements are designed to achieve this end.
The test of the success of art criticism with a given person is: Has this essay or book of art criticism increased or enhanced the person’s understanding or appreciation of the work of art in question? Art criticism is particularly helpful and often necessary for works of art that are more than usually difficult, such that persons not already familiar with the artist or the genre or the period would be unable to adequately understand or enjoy the work if left to themselves.
The task of the philosopher of art is more fundamental than that of the art critic in that the critic’s pronouncements presuppose answers to the questions set by the philosopher of art. The critic says that a given work of music is expressive, but the philosopher of art asks what is meant by saying that a work of art is expressive and how one determines whether it is. In speaking and writing about art, critics presuppose that they are dealing with clear concepts, the attainment of which is the task of the philosopher of art.
The task of the philosopher of art is not to heighten understanding and appreciation of works of art but to provide conceptual foundations for the critic by (1) examining the basic concepts that underlie the activities of critics and enable them to speak and write more intelligibly about the arts and by (2) arriving at true conclusions about art, aesthetic value, expression, and the other concepts that critics employ.
Upon what do philosophers of art direct their attention? “Art” is the ready answer, but what is art and what distinguishes it from all other things? The theorists who have attempted to answer this question are many, and their answers differ greatly. But there is one feature that virtually all of them have in common: a work of art is a human-made thing, an artifact, as distinguished from an object in nature. A sunset may be beautiful, but it is not a work of art. A piece of driftwood may have aesthetic qualities, but it is not a work of art since it was not made by a human. On the other hand, a piece of wood that has been carved to look like driftwood is not an object of nature but of art, even though the appearance of the two may be exactly the same. This distinction was challenged in the 20th century by artists who declared that objets trouvés (“found objects”) are works of art, since the artist’s perception of them as such makes them so, even if the objects were not human-made and were not modified in any way (except by exhibition) from their natural state.
Special offer for students! Check out our special academic rate and excel this spring semester!
- John Hospers
People also ask
Is philosophy an art or a science?
What is the difference between science and art?
Can art be defined in contemporary philosophy?
What is philosophy of Art?
Nov 3, 2023 · But unlike art, science is about interrogating the world in a way that is hopefully repeatable, adds UK-based artist Luke Jerram, who creates sculptures, installations and live...
Aug 5, 2016 · Because science is predicated on forever reaching into the unknown, Schopenhauer argues, it is therefore inherently forward-leaning and unfinishable, whereas art is about resting the attention on a particular object and beholding it with absolute presence. He writes:
Oct 23, 2007 · The Definition of Art. The definition of art is controversial in contemporary philosophy. Whether art can be defined has also been a matter of controversy. The philosophical usefulness of a definition of art has also been debated. Contemporary definitions can be classified with respect to the dimensions of art they emphasize.
Dec 1, 2020 · What's the Connection Between Art and Science? | Psychology Today. Matt Johnson Ph.D. Mind, Brain, and Value. Neuroscience. What's the Connection Between Art and Science? Art and science are...
Nov 14, 2022 · Some are performers—actors, singers, musicians—bringing beauty to new life. No less than the discovery of truth, the creation of beauty is central to the university’s life. This distinction between truth and beauty, between scientist and artist, should not be drawn too sharply, for two reasons.
