Eva Lín Vilhjálmsdóttir – King’s College London
Morris Weitz, in his The Role of Theory in Aesthetics questions the art theorist project of
defining and delineating the concept of art. He finds the search for a set of necessary and sufficient
conditions for something to be defined as art problematic. Art is an open concept according to Weitz,
and he states that: “the very expansive, adventurous character of art, its ever-present changes and
novel creations, makes it logically impossible to ensure any set of defining properties. We can, of
course, choose to close the concept. But to do this with “art” or “tragedy” or “portraiture,” etc., is
ludicrous since it forecloses on the very conditions of creativity in the arts.” He expounds his view
by referring to Wittgenstein’s ideas about language-games from his Philosophical Investigations. We
should shift our questions from what is art to how do we use the concept art? How is the word ‘art’
used in language? We should not look for the last and final definition of art but for how artworks
resemble each other, looking for family resemblance. We could find some paradigm cases of art to
use as a measuring stick, but that is not all-encompassing.
Furthermore, Weitz mentions two ways of elucidating the usage of the concept of art. On the
one hand, there are descriptive usages; when we describe something as 'art' which is analogous to
describing something as a chair. The descriptive questions entail what we do when we might find
similar conditions, properties that are present in most artworks, rather than necessary conditions for
a work of art to be considered art. On the other hand, evaluative usage such as “is this good art?”
concerns how we praise a work of art as a work of art, what conditions constitute an excellent work
of art? In his view, these usages of art are often confused, and this creates problems for the definition
of art. Weitz’s clarification is, however, not bulletproof since it is from 1956, and one could say that
the descriptive usage no longer applies. If we can, in the year 2020, use the word art for anything, we
have to rethink the open concept of art.
If taken this way, theories of art are saved from pointlessness or inanity. Diving into the use
of the concept of art, therefore opens up a whole world of possible ‘living’ definitions of art,
definitions that are ‘forthcoming’. The end of art is, according to my reading of Weitz, a false view
of art: it entails looking at art as a closed concept, defined logically, which is impossible since art is
an empirical concept.
Is it the task of philosophy to define art? On Weitz’s view, yes – but in a different sense than
before. Art might be more active than ever because of the false idea of sufficient and necessary
conditions of art have been uncovered. The musician does not have to be a virtuoso, and visual art