The relationship between art and philosophical ethics can be divided into a dichotomy of two, radical understandings: aestheticism and moralism. Aestheticism prioritizes, if not entirely isolates, the artistic and technical value of an artwork over its moral implications. The aesthetic tradition asserts that art ought to be composed solely “for art’s sake,” hinging this position upon the assumption that only the essential component of an artwork—the sense to which the artwork is intended to appeal—is relevant in its critique (Peek, “Ethical Criticism of Art”). Within classical aesthetics, this conception of artistic value is epitomized by Enlightenment-era rationalist Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Judgment, in which he argues that one’s judgment of art must be of inherent “disinterest,” unconstrained by concepts of utility and morality. Kant suggests that art ought to be judged only upon its formal properties, such as design and composition, instead of for its perceived practical or moral worth. In this way, Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa, for example, would not be judged based upon da Vinci’s perceived psychological neuroses nor for the paintings modern relevance and fame, but on its arrangement: the use of contrapposto, pyramidal perspective, curved and straight lines.
This perspective is rivaled by Moralism. The Moralist theory emphasizes that the aesthetic value of an artwork is determined, or at least influenced, by its ethical premise. This school of thought formed the foundation of the modern philosophical study of art, making the discipline of recurring interest and debate since Plato’s aesthetics. To reference his “Parable of the Cave,” Plato interprets the arts not as shining indications of the enlightened world beyond the ...
... middle of paper ...
...and ethics remain modernly relevant, still intersecting in our popular culture.
Works Cited
Peek, Ella. "Ethical Criticism of Art" Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ISSN 2161-0002, Martin: University of Tennessee, 2005. Art, Ethical Criticism of. Web. 19 Jan. 2013.
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of the Power of Judgment. Trans. Paul Guyer. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ., 2009. Print.
Devereaux, Mary. "The Philosophical Status of Aesthetics." 1997 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Aesthetics. New Mexico, Santa Fe. 1997. Speech.
Plato. Plato, Complete in Twelve Volumes. Trans. Harold N. Fowler et al. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ., 1978. Print.
Simon Schama’s Power of Art. Dir. Clare Beavan. Perf. Simon Schama. BBC, 2006. DVD.
Maritain, Jacques. “The Responsibility of the Artist.” The Responsibility of the Artist. University of Notre Dame, 2010. Web. 21 Dec. 2013.
Plato. Republic. Trans. G.M.A. Grube and C.D.C. Reeve. Plato Complete Works. Ed. John M. Cooper. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997.
He clarifies his interpretation of aesthetic value, rejecting the traditionally narrow notions regarding beauty and composition, and expands his view to include insights and emotions expressed through the medium. Explaining that he views overall value as an all-things-considered judgement, he asserts the ethicist’s duty to contrast the aesthetic with the ethical and determine the extent to which one outweighs the other. Gaut calls on readers to defy the popular paradigm equating beauty with goodness and ugly with evil, allowing for great, yet flawed pieces of
People can have many different opinions depending on a topic, but what is truly difficult is getting a complete level of understanding from every opinion, or understanding the point of view of each opinion. Even accepting the points of view can be difficult for some people, who believe that their opinions are right. Luckily, people can learn about the other person’s frame of reference, and at the very least understand the topic or the person a little better. This particular topic is art, which is known for its multiple possible perceptions or its many different messages that it can send a person or group of people. In this way, people can learn more about the thought processes and feelings of others. Unfortunately, with differing opinions,
Before you begin reading this paper, look through the appendix. Are you shocked? Disgusted? Intrigued? Viewers of such controversial artwork often experience a wide spectrum of reactions ranging from the petrified to the pleased. Questions may arise within the viewer regarding the artistic merit and legitimacy of this unorthodox artwork. However, art's primary purpose, according to Maya Angelou, “is to serve humanity. Art that does not increase our understanding of this particular journey or our ability to withstand this particular journey, which is life, is an exercise in futile indulgence” (Buchwalter 27). To expand on Angelou's analogy, because everyone experiences a different life journey, art is different to everyone. In other words, art is subjective to the viewer. The viewer creates his own definition of what is art and what is not art. Some may recognize the artistic value of a piece of artwork, while others may find it obscene. Some may praise the artwork, while others will protest it. Censorship is derived from these differing perspectives on artwork. Through censorship, communities seek to establish boundaries and criteria that limit an artist's ability to produce “proper” artwork. However, some artists choose to ignore these boundaries in order to expand the scope of art and, in their view, better serve humanity.
Our perception of moral judgments sometimes affects the ways in which knowledge is produced. In these two areas of knowledge, the natural sciences and the arts, the ways of knowing are different as is the nature of the knowledge produced. Likewise, ethical judgments may or may not limit knowledge in these areas but in different ways. Ethical judgments may lead to questioning the means by which some scientific knowledge is produced. Significant, meaningful works of art are produced only when the artist is able to transmit an emotion to the spectator, reader or listener effectively. This is why powerful emotional reactions to a work of art sometimes produce strong and often opposing ethical judgements which can limit the artist’s opportunities to produce knowledge.
Goldwater, Robert and Marco Treves (eds.). Artists on Art: from the XIV to the XX Century. New York: Pantheon Books, 1945.
My goal for this paper is to give a practical critique and defense of what I have learned in my time as a Studio Art Major. During my time here I have learned that Pensacola Christian college’s definition of art “art is the organized visual expression of ideas or feelings” and the four parts of Biblosophy: cannon, communication, client, and creativity. Along with Biblosophy I have studied Dr. Frances Schaeffer 's criteria for art, seeing how the technical, and the major and minor messages in artwork. All of these principles are great but they do need to be refined.
Whether it be writers, painters, sculptors, musicians, or photographers, artists all over the world have striven to show people their views of the world, of people, and even of the universe itself. Throughout history the creative urge of man to present to fellow men a different perspective or representation of life-or even the afterlife-has surfaced time and time again in the form of artwork. Sometimes it comes through genius and complexity, full of meaning and symbolism. Others, it is simple and void of any clear meaning at all other than that it is art. Soon, however, there became a point when the work of art was no longer something one could just look at and understand; the principle of the matter had changed. Art leapt from viewable understanding straight into the Modern movement where theory became art, and to understand it, one must know the theory it is based upon. Never was this more apparent than in the artwork of the abstract expressionist. Essentially, artwork is not art because of theory, and art based on theory cannot be creative or truly said to be art.
Plato. Translated by Martin Ostwasl, Edited and Introduced by Gregory Vlastos. 1956. Protagoras. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Philosophies of Art and Beauty Edited by Hofstadter and Kuhns, (Chicago: University of Chicago press, 1976) chapters one and two for an overview of the aesthetics of Plato and Aristotle.
For over two thousand years, various philosophers have questioned the influence of art in our society. They have used abstract reasoning, human emotions, and logic to go beyond this world in the search for answers about arts' existence. For philosophers, art was not viewed for its own beauty, but rather for the question of how art and artists can help make our society more stable for the next generation. Plato, a Greek philosopher who lived during 420-348 B.C. in Athens, and Aristotle, Plato’s student who argued against his beliefs, have no exceptions to the steps they had to take in order to understand the purpose of art and artists. Though these two philosophers made marvelous discoveries about the existence of art, artists, and aesthetic experience, Plato has made his works more controversial than Aristotle.
middle of paper ... ... Although subject to change in different cultures, the societal norm of placing an ethical code helps us to set the “right” amount of boundaries in areas of knowledge, including the arts and the natural sciences. Like I said before, there are many complications to this as both scientists and artists are put in situations where they must face the fine line between having a scientific/artistic role or ethical role in creating opportunities for knowledge. Works Cited McKie, Robin.
Goldblatt, and Brown. Aesthetics: A Reader in Philosophy of the Arts, Upper Saddle Ridge, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997.
The relationship between art and society: Mimesis as discussed in the works of Aristotle, Plato, Horace and Longinus The relationship between art and society in the works of Plato are based upon his idea of the world of eternal Forms. He believed that there is a world of eternal, absolute and immutable Forms (the world of the Ideal) and thought that this is proven by when man is faced with the appearance of anything in the material world, his mind is moved to a remembrance of the Idea or an absolute and immutable version of the thing he sees. It is this moment of recollection that he wonders about the contrast between the world of shadows and the world of the Ideal. It is in this moment of wondering that man struggles to reach the world of Forms through the use of reason. Anything then that does not serve reason is the enemy of man. Given this, it is only but logical that poetry should be eradicated from society. Poetry shifts man’s focus away from reason by presenting man with imitations of objects from the concrete world. Poetry, with its focus on mimesis or imitation, has no moral value. While Plato sees reality as a shadow of a realm of pure Ideas (which in turn is copied by art), Aristotle sees reality as a process of partially realized forms moving towards their ideal realizations. Given this idea by Aristotle, the mimetic quality of art is redefined as the duplication of the living process of nature and its need to reach its potential form.
“In a decaying society, art, if it is truthful, must also reflect decay. Moreover, unless it wants to break faith with its social function, art must show the world as changeable. And help to change it.” This quote by Ernst Fischer, a German composer, means that truth in art exposes the parts of society, and of life, that no one wants to see. In order for art to change society, it must first reflect the fears and failures of its people. The artist can change how people think of themselves and the world by using less conventional methods of creating art. The artist, in doing this, introduces new ideas of human placement in time and space, new frontiers of thought, that are furthered by the disciplines of science and philosophy. The artist works to introduces unique- and sometimes offensive- ideas so that society will be exposed to new ways of thinking and understanding the world. The artist does this through experimentation with color, style, and form. Therefore, the purpose of the artist should be to challenge how individuals perceive themselves and the offensive aspects of society reflected in art to bring about innovations in the greater society.