Abstract
Monroe Beardsley presents an aesthetic definition of art in “An Aesthetic Definition of Art” (1983), in which he claims that there is a necessary connection between art and aesthetics. Beardsley proposes that a work of art is something made with the intention of having the capacity to satisfy an aesthetic interest. Noël Carroll claims that there are artworks created without aesthetic intentions and that some artworks do not have the capacity to provide aesthetic experiences. In addition, Carroll argues that there are artworks whose status of art is prior to the appreciation of these works as art. The aim of this paper is to present Beardsley’s aesthetic definition of art and analyze how objections to it can be answered.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Philosophica: International Journal for the History of Philosophy
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
