Pornography Stumps Analytic Philosophers of Art
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
|
"The categories of pornography and erotic art are just convenient pigeon holes for thought. There is no real quality of pornographicness or eroticness. The music of the train is music if I choose to call it so, and more so in musique concrète." --P.135-6 |
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
"Pornography Stumps Analytic Philosophers of Art" (2014) is a review essay by Ian Jarvie of Art & Pornography: Philosophical Essays (2012) in which he criticizes the Levinson/Maes episode in the pornographic art debate as essentialist, justificationist and a revival of ordinary language philosophy; an example of armchair philosophy which would have benefited from empirical research.
[edit]
Abstract
- "A book in which analytic philosophers examine the portrayal of sex in art and the possible artistic value of pornography proves a disappointment. Although a transcendental objection to pornographic art is rebutted, the papers employ barren philosophical methods that divert energy away from significant problems and into scholastic quibbles."
[edit]
See also
Unless indicated otherwise, the text in this article is either based on Wikipedia article "Pornography Stumps Analytic Philosophers of Art" or another language Wikipedia page thereof used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License; or on research by Jahsonic and friends. See Art and Popular Culture's copyright notice.
