Putting together my thesis for my Philosophy of Art paper… and I’m finding trouble really making everything come together. If it gives you any more reason to help me, it is my 20th birthday today.
I’m hoping someone out here will please put some thought into this as well. I’m going to put on my bullets which I’ve come up to sort of show what I’m planning on writing about and what I plan to defend. I’m pretty much looking for any ideas people have though. I’ll surely be reading everything and valuing it at the same degree.
Here’s what I have:
· There is a family, a tradition of art. This tradition relies entirely on set conditions, some which are necessary, and together able to sufficient.
· With the “right intentions”, some objects, artifacts, projections, and notions (generally speaking a device) become art through the same intentional processing.
· The artistic “is” is the necessary condition for an object which is being advocated to be at the artistic “stature” necessary to be set with/against artistic sufficiency.
· The second condition, which is the individuality of the object, comes with the artistic “is” to defend the claim, put it in a position to be “read” through its comparison to other pieces which have previously been accepted to meet the sufficiency, and to separate the object in question, along with its “is”, from the artist, claimer, or both if that be the case.
Also, I intend to be using T.S. Eliot and a man named “Danto” (I forget his first name) as my main two defenders, but if you have any ideas of people who discuss the same ideas I’ll read into them.
Anyone seen an objection? or a way to possibly better say what I’m trying to say?
Even E-mail if you wish not to comment: michaellucianojr@gmail.com
Thank you anyone who does take interest in this. If what you put together is worthy I’ll be quoting you and putting you as a source, that is if you’re not quoting someone else, but I’ll put you as some sort of medium as to how I got to that knowledge. I must stop writing this post now and get back to my paper!
Thanks for reading this far, if you didn’t just scroll down,
Michael
