Búsqueda avanzada
Buscar en:   Desde:
La teoría del arte de Arthur Danto: Ontología e institución
Karczmarczyk, Pedro.
REVISTA LATINOAMERICANA DE FILOSOFíA, vol. XXX, núm. 2, 2004, pp. 385-403.
">Arthur Danto’s Theory of art. Ontology and Institution" According to Danto giving the art status to Warhol’s ">Brillo box" was a discovery and not an invention. This is crucial in his adoption of an Ontological theory of art. In his view an Ontological theory allows two possibilities that an Institutionalist one doesn’t: that something is considered art wrongly, i.e. mostly considered art without being art, and that something is art without being believed as such. I argue that this dilemma is false. The Institutionalist only excludes the possibility that the belief of the majority could be globally wrong because of the constitutive role it plays. Analogically, he can allow the possibility of a particular note not being money although it is generally believed to be so, just because it is agreed that notes are money only when they are issued according to specific procedures. In conclusion Danto’s theory is not conceptually opposed to Institutional theories. The Institutionalist can also allow that giving the status art to "Brillo box" was a discovery.
Creative Commons
Esta obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons.
Para ver una copia de esta licencia, visite