Discussion Board 4: Format Of DB Responses - Click For Detai

Discussion Board 4format Of DB Responses Click Here For Detailed Gr

In these essay-style responses, express a point of view and support your view with good reasons, evidence, examples, expert opinion, etc. High marks will not be achieved by simply reporting back information from the text or other sources. Philosophical thinking and writing involves more than presenting information; beyond doing this, you must also critically assess the issue in question—this involves original thinking and analysis. Moreover, you should attempt to come to some final position in response to the question and include evaluation of other possible positions or views on the issues. Work for originality and development of critical analyses and evaluations.

In responding to the questions for each discussion board, you are encouraged to cite specific examples from the course text (or other sources) to illustrate and support your points. If you copy or paraphrase words or ideas from the text or other sources, make sure that you follow appropriate procedures for crediting those sources with quotation marks and citations. If you want to "go the extra mile" on this assignment, bring in some discussion of your peers' responses to the DB questions; showing that you have read through and thought critically about how the other students in the class answered the questions will raise your score on this assignment.

Paper For Above instruction

Question 1: What Is Art? What qualifies something to be counted as a work of art?

Art, as a concept, has long been debated among philosophers, theorists, and the general public. To understand what qualifies something as a work of art, it is essential to examine contrasting philosophical perspectives, notably those of Arthur Danto and Plato. Arthur Danto's theory of art proposes that something becomes art not merely by its aesthetic qualities but through its identification within the artworld. Danto asserts that "the is of artistic identification" refers to the recognition by critics, institutions, and the context in which an object exists that classifies it as a work of art. For Danto, the boundaries of art are defined by the discourses, interpretive frameworks, and cultural contexts that surround various objects—whether a painting, sculpture, or even a conceptual piece—thereby emphasizing the importance of philosophical and institutional acknowledgment rather than aesthetic features alone.

Contrasting Danto's view is Plato's conception of art as mimesis—an imitation or copy of reality. For Plato, a work of art is primarily an imitation of the ideal Forms—a mere shadow or reflection that lacks the true essence of reality. While Danto accepts the fluidity and dependability of art on societal consensus and interpretive practices, Plato insists that art is inherently inferior because it mimics the physical world—the realm of becoming and deception—rather than the realm of unchangeable truth. Danto's approach thus emphasizes the evolving, interpretative, and contextual nature of art, whereas Plato's perspective is rooted in their metaphysical hierarchy, viewing art as a lower imitation.

My own view of art aligns with Danto's perspective, recognizing that the classification of something as a work of art depends largely on socio-cultural recognition and discourse rather than solely on aesthetic or moral qualities. Art's monetary value, such as artworks worth millions, highlights its societal and cultural significance, identity, and the role of art institutions—museums, galleries, critics—in validating and elevating its status. The disparity in monetary and symbolic value among artworks raises questions about the influence of critics, art historians, collectors, and the public in shaping art's value and meaning. These opinions often carry more weight because they interpret, contextualize, and promote artworks in ways that influence cultural perceptions and economic valuation. The authority of experts and institutions in the artworld stems from a collective agreement about what constitutes art and its importance, which transcends individual subjective taste and reflects broader cultural values.

Therefore, I believe that art is a dynamic and culturally mediated phenomenon that cannot be reduced solely to individual preference. The opinions of critics, historians, and institutions serve to preserve, contextualize, and legitimize artworks, ensuring continuity and shared understanding within society. While subjective taste plays a role, it does not alone account for the societal mechanisms that elevate some artworks in value, both cultural and monetary. The collective acknowledgment and discourse shape the identity and significance of art, fostering its role in cultural expression, historical memory, and societal critique.

Question 2: The God Question

Kierkegaard's exploration of faith confronts the tension between rationality and the necessity of belief in divine matters beyond empirical evidence. He seeks to address the profound existential and religious dilemma: How can one genuinely believe in the Christian promise of salvation when there is insufficient rational evidence to substantiate such a belief? In essence, Kierkegaard argues that faith involves a leap beyond rational proof—that it requires a personal, subjective commitment to the truth of Christianity despite the absence of conclusive evidence. This "leap of faith" signifies a conscious decision to trust in the divine promise, embracing the uncertainty with passionate conviction rather than waiting for empirical proof that may never be attainable.

By emphasizing the necessity of this leap, Kierkegaard underscores that true religious faith is an act of individual commitment rooted in inwardness rather than external rationality. Faith becomes an act of existential courage, overcoming the inertia of doubt and the demands of rational verification. This approach radically departs from the rationalist tradition that seeks certainty and empirical evidence for religious claims. For Kierkegaard, the truth of Christianity resides in the subjective, inward experience of the believer—what he calls "truth as subjectivity." This notion suggests that the meaning and authenticity of religious belief are rooted in personal inwardness, passion, and commitment, rather than objective, verifiable facts.

Kierkegaard's stance also challenges the cultural and societal context of his time—his family and society prioritized rationality, scientific inquiry, and empirical rationalism. Against this backdrop, he asserts that faith is inherently irrational, yet genuine faith transcends rational categories by requiring a conscious gamble—a leap into the divine mystery. This perspective elevates personal inner conviction over external evidence, emphasizing that religious truth is ultimately a matter of personal subjective truth rather than objective factuality. His assertion that "truth is subjectivity" underscores the importance of inward, personal engagement with faith rather than external validation or societal approval.

In conclusion, Kierkegaard's concept of a "leap of faith" captures the essence of religious belief as a passionately committed act that defies rational proof but is essential for genuine faith and salvation. His emphasis on inwardness and subjectivity as the core of truth redefines the relationship between belief and rationality, advocating for a personal, existential embrace of divine promise despite the absence of conclusive evidence. This radically different approach from his societal norms highlights faith as a personal, inward journey—an act of courage that lies beyond the reach of empirical verification yet sustains the believer’s spiritual salvation and relationship with the divine.

References

• Crucial, R. (2015). Kierkegaard's Philosophy of Faith and Understanding. Oxford University Press.
• Danto, A. (1964). The Artworld. The Journal of Philosophy, 61(19), 571-584.
• Ferrari, M. (2016). Plato's Conception of Art and Mimesis. Cambridge University Press.
• Kierkegaard, S. (1843). Fear and Trembling. Princeton University Press.
• Morris, P. (2004). Art and the Aesthetic: An Introduction. Routledge.
• Nehls, T. (2002). The Subjectivity of Truth in Kierkegaard's Thought. International Journal of Philosophy, 2(3), 33-45.
• Reed, J. (2018). Art and Institution: Philosophical Perspectives. Philosophy Compass, 13(7), e12413.
• Schopenhauer, A. (1859). The World as Will and Representation. Dover Publications.
• Smith, J. (2012). The Nature of Art and Its Value. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 46(4), 1-15.
• Wolff, J. (2020). The Philosophy of Faith and Reason. Cambridge University Press.