(What) Do We Owe Beautiful Objects? A Case for Aesthetic Obligations

Bibliographic Data

ID4159748
AuthorsElisabeth Schellekens (0000-0002-0971-9308, Uppsala University, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume64
Issue3
Pages317-334
Publication date2024-08-13
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe British Journal of Aesthetics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0007-0904 • E-ISSN: 1468-2842
PublisherOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/aesthj/ayae001
OpenAlexW4400433331
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited9

This paper has two main aims. The first is to examine our normative relations to artworks and cultural artefacts threatened by damage or destruction. The second aim is to develop an argument for the notion of aesthetic obligation, offering an alternative model of explanation of our normative relations to artworks and cultural artefacts which relies neither exclusively on the object of appreciation ('object-oriented approach') nor on the appreciating subject ('subject-oriented approach'). Instead, an aesthetic obligation is held to be directed primarily towards the community which appreciates the object on the grounds of its aesthetic value. That which unites an aesthetic community is the practice of valuing an object for its aesthetic character. The notion of aesthetic obligation thus relies both on the community of subjects which holds an object in high aesthetic regard and that same object's aesthetic value

Aesthetic value · Aesthetics · Argument (complex analysis · Character (mathematics · Epistemology · Linguistics · Normative · Object (grammar · Obligation · Political science · Sociology · Subject (documents · Value (mathematics · Computer Science · Free Will and Agency · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Mathematics · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access