PrepTest 94+, Section 2, Question 21
Philosopher: For some kinds of art, there is truth to the adage that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A painting or sculpture that strikes one person as having artistic value may strike another as lacking such value. Consequently, there are no valid objective standards for determining the artistic value of a painting or a sculpture.
Philosopher: For some kinds of art, there is truth to the adage that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A painting or sculpture that strikes one person as having artistic value may strike another as lacking such value. Consequently, there are no valid objective standards for determining the artistic value of a painting or a sculpture.
Philosopher: For some kinds of art, there is truth to the adage that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A painting or sculpture that strikes one person as having artistic value may strike another as lacking such value. Consequently, there are no valid objective standards for determining the artistic value of a painting or a sculpture.
Philosopher: For some kinds of art, there is truth to the adage that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A painting or sculpture that strikes one person as having artistic value may strike another as lacking such value. Consequently, there are no valid objective standards for determining the artistic value of a painting or a sculpture.
The philosopher's reasoning is flawed because it
relies exclusively on an old adage whose truth has not been demonstrated
ignores the fact that there are other kinds of art, such as literature and poetry, that may also occasion disagreement
fails to consider whether there are valid objective standards for evaluating nonvisual art, such as music
fails to consider that people who disagree about the artistic value of a given painting may be incorrectly applying the same evaluation criteria to that painting
fails to consider that the individuals judging and disagreeing about works of art may be experts in making such judgments
0 Comments