Abstract
This essay takes Arthur Danto's end-of-art thesis as a case in point of a substantive philosophy of history. Such philosophy explains the direction that art has taken and why that direction could not have been different. Danto never scrutinized the philosophy of history that his end-of-art thesis presumes. I aim to do that by drawing a distinction between what I refer to as the common view of history and the philosophical view of history, and by arguing that we need the latter if we want to properly assess the plausibility of the end-of-art thesis.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 235-256 |
| Number of pages | 22 |
| Journal | Journal of the Philosophy of History |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 21 Jun 2019 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2019 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Aesthetics
- Art history
- Arthur Danto
- End of art
- Philosophical view of history
- Substantive philosophy of history
Cite this
}
Arthur Danto, the end of art, and the philosophical view of history. / Van Den Akker, Chiel.
In: Journal of the Philosophy of History, Vol. 13, No. 2, 2019, p. 235-256.Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Arthur Danto, the end of art, and the philosophical view of history
AU - Van Den Akker, Chiel
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - This essay takes Arthur Danto's end-of-art thesis as a case in point of a substantive philosophy of history. Such philosophy explains the direction that art has taken and why that direction could not have been different. Danto never scrutinized the philosophy of history that his end-of-art thesis presumes. I aim to do that by drawing a distinction between what I refer to as the common view of history and the philosophical view of history, and by arguing that we need the latter if we want to properly assess the plausibility of the end-of-art thesis.
AB - This essay takes Arthur Danto's end-of-art thesis as a case in point of a substantive philosophy of history. Such philosophy explains the direction that art has taken and why that direction could not have been different. Danto never scrutinized the philosophy of history that his end-of-art thesis presumes. I aim to do that by drawing a distinction between what I refer to as the common view of history and the philosophical view of history, and by arguing that we need the latter if we want to properly assess the plausibility of the end-of-art thesis.
KW - Aesthetics
KW - Art history
KW - Arthur Danto
KW - End of art
KW - Philosophical view of history
KW - Substantive philosophy of history
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068382742&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068382742&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1163/18722636-12341389
DO - 10.1163/18722636-12341389
M3 - Article
VL - 13
SP - 235
EP - 256
JO - Journal of the Philosophy of History
JF - Journal of the Philosophy of History
SN - 1872-261X
IS - 2
ER -