Institutions and the Artworld – A Critical Note
Keywords:
John Searle, Francesco Guala, game theory, art, artworld, institutionsAbstract
Contemporary theories of institutions as clusters of stable solutions to recurrent coordination problems can illuminate and explain some unresolved difficulties and problems adhering to institutional definitions of art initiated by George Dickie and Arthur Danto. Their account of what confers upon objects their institutional character does not fit well with current work on institutions and social ontology. The claim that “the artworld” confers the status of “art” onto objects remains utterly mysterious. The “artworld” is a generic notion that designates a sphere of human activity that involves practices that create goals that have led to the emergence of formal and informal institutions. But those institutions, rather than magically “creating” objects subjected to esthetic appreciation, merely solve familiar and ubiquitous coordination problems created by artistic activity in ways other institutions in other areas (science, religion, education…) solve similar and/or analogous coordination problems.
References
Bloom, Paul (2010): How Pleasure Works. Why We Like What We Like. London: Vintage Books.
Buekens, Filip (2013): “Searlean Reflections on Sacred Mountains”. In: A. Konzelmann Ziv and H.B. Schmid (Eds.): Institutions, Emotions and Group Agents. Philosophical Studies Series 212. Berlin: Springer, p. 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6934-2_3
Danto, Arthur (1964): “The Artworld”. In: Journal of Philosophy 61, p. 571–584. https://doi.org/10.2307/2022937
Danto, A. (2010): The Transfiguration of the Commonplace. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Davies, Stephen (1991): Definitions of Art. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501721182
Dickie, George (1974): Art and the Aesthetic. New York: Cornell University Press.
Dutton, Denis (2006): “A naturalistic Definition of Art”. In: Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 64. No. 3, p. 367–377. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-594X.2006.00217.x
Epstein, Brian (2015): The Ant Trap. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199381104.001.0001
Fiske, A.P. (1992): “The Four Elementary Forms of Sociality: Framework for a Unified Theory of Social Relations”. In: Psychological Review, 99, p. 689–723. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.4.689
Fokt, Simon (2013): “Solving Wollheim’s dilemma: A Fix for the Institutional Definition of Art”. In: Metaphilosophy 44, p. 640–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/meta.12057
Fokt, Simon (2017): “The Cultural Definition of Art”. In: Metaphilosophy 48, p. 404–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/meta.12251
Gintis, Herbert (2014): The Bounds of Reason: Game Theory and the Unification of the Behavioral Sciences. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691160849.001.0001
Guala, Francesco (2016): Understanding Institutions. The Science and Philosophy of Living Together. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400880911
Guala, Francesco and Frank Hindriks (2014): “Institutions, Rules and Equilibria: A Unified Theory”. In: Journal of Institutional Economics, p. 11–22.
Kraut, Robert (2007): Artworld Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199228126.001.0001
Lewis, David (1969): Convention. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lindahl, Lars (1977): Position and Change. Dordrecht: Reidel. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1202-7
Newman, G.E. and P. Bloom (2011): “Art and Authenticity: The Importance of Originals in Judgements of Value”. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 141. No. 3, p. 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026035
North, Douglass (1990): Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
Pratten, Stephen (Ed.) (2015): Social Ontology and Modern Economics. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315780900
Schelling, Thomas (1960): The Strategy of Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Searle, John (1995): The Construction of Social Reality. London: Penguin.
Searle, John (2010): Making the Social World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780195396171.001.0001
Smit, JP, Filip Buekens, and S. Du Plessis (2011): “What is Money? An Alternative to Searle’s Institutional Facts”. In: Philosophy and Economics 27. No. 34, p. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267110000441
Tuomela, Raimo (2013): Social Ontology: Collective Intentions and Group Agents. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199978267.001.0001
Ullmann-Margalit, Edna (1977): The Emergence of Norms. Oxford: University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Filip Buekens, J.P. Smit
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
