Philosophy of Animal-Made Art | فلسفه هنرِ جانور-ساخت

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In this article, first of all, I (hereafter: the writer) have presented an interpretation of aesthetic universality and it is argued that each definition of art has to admit the aesthetic universality. Next, the writer has argued that there is a relation between creativity and aesthetic universality, and it is claimed that there is the same aesthetic universality by the creative processes, products, and persons, both scientifically and philosophically; and so, the relation represents that aesthetic universality is true. Moreover, the writer has applied the aesthetic universality by creativity to the philosophy of animal-made art. It is not only has been done by epistemic and conceptual arguments of contemporary philosophers but also the writer illustrates that first of all, the normativity of the philosophy of animal-made art is prior to the descriptive one; secondly, the aesthetic universality is the criteria to know that animal-made art is impossible. Even though it is possible to make the human-made animal art through transplantation or chimera and it is clear that it would not be animal-made art.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2020-06-05
Latest version: 2 (2020-07-07)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
45 ( #44,236 of 51,738 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
45 ( #12,541 of 51,738 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.