Artworks are valuable for their own sake
Date issued
Authors
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
License
Abstract
To hold that artworks are valuable for their own sake—regardless of whatever secondary value they may have, such as entertainment, formation, education, or a pleasurable experience—is to hold that their final worth is not derived from external or secondary ends. I call this collective set of views the end-in-itself view (or EI view). Nicholas Stang recently leveled a twofold charge of reductio ad absurdum and operating from a double standard against the EI view. In this article, I refute Stang by showing that the charges do not obtain for at least one variation of the EI view that holds artworks to be valuable for their own sake as internally purposive ends-in-themselves (the IP view).
Description
Keywords
Citation
Published in
Journal of the American Philosophical Association, 9, 2, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1017/apa.2022.5