No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
On Talking about the Arts
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 February 2009
Extract
I want to concentrate on two kinds of talking about the arts. One concerns those aspects of the language of philosophical aesthetics in which generalisations about ‘art’ and ‘the arts’ are made. The other concerns the language of the critic in so far as it can be stated as having a very particular aim: ‘the stimulation’ (in, say, a reader) ‘of interest and the heightening of insight and the education of his ability to make his own appreciative judgments from direct experience’.
Information
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1966
References
page 320 note 1 Osborne, Harold, Aesthetics and Criticism, p. 22.Google Scholar
page 321 note 1 p. 183.
page 326 note 1 ‘Logic and Appreciation’ in Aesthetics and Language (ed. Elton), pp. 161 sq. and 166.Google Scholar
page 327 note 1 ‘Critical Communication’, in Elton, pp. 135–6.Google Scholar
page 327 note 2 ‘Critical Communication’, in Elton, op. cit., pp. 136–7.Google Scholar
page 328 note 1 The word ‘emergent’ is only tentatively suggested here and the parallel with evolutionary emergence where the preconditions of an emergent can be scientifically determined, is tenuous.
page 328 note 2 Ibid., pp. 137–8.
page 328 note 3 Ibid.
page 329 note 1 This is a mistake constantly made. It is made in rather different ways by (e.g.) Morris Weitz (The Role of Theory in Aesthetics) and by Hew Morris Jones in bis paper to the 1964 Amsterdam Congress. Both assume that aesthetics generalises particular ‘isms’.