Is there any rationale to prefer, in academic fields of art, Continental philosophy over Analytic philosophy? I guess there might be a historical reason why philosophy evolved into two approaches but why I do not hear in my art studies anything about analytic philosophy of art as if it never existed, and only hear about Barthes, Foucault, and their like?

  • 10
    Because continental philosophy traditionally focuses more on humanities, and analytic philosophy more on sciences, and people in art studies probably find the analytic approach less congenial to art. But if you are interested, Beardsley is a classic of analytic aesthetics, and there is a recent volume Analytic Approaches to Aesthetics. – Conifold Nov 13 '20 at 18:22
  • 3
    @Conifold, thank you! Great source! Over time perhaps the attitude of art historians and art academics will change. I do not see contradiction between being analytic and an artist. And it is frustrating for me to be around people that still hold to romanticism or otherwise talk about postmodernism while falling into relativism. I really wish the intellectual atmosphere of my studies would have been more analytic without of course dismissing the engagement with art. Anyway. – Luna Nov 14 '20 at 12:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.