Problem Parameter and Problem Finding in Art Education

The significance of problem parameters in art education is examined. Problem parameters are delineated by the art instructor in the problem finding stage of the creative process before problem solving occurs. Problem parameters define problems and focus students' creative processes. In the delivery of an assignment, the art teacher presents problem parameters to students and students respond to parameters. A model is proposed illustrating the relationship between the presented problem parameters of art assignments and the creative processes of students. Characteristics of the instructional implementations of parameters are examined: Incomplete Parameters; Overly and Inadequately Restrictive Parameters; and Expanding and Contracting Parameters. Student responses to parameters are explored: Disregarded, Self-imposed, and Stretched Parameters. The implications of the model in art education are discussed.     

A Moral Problem for Difficult Art

Works of art can be difficult in several ways. One important way is by making us face up to unsettling truths. Such works typically receive praise. I maintain, however, that sometimes they deserve moral censure. The crux of my argument is that, just as we have a right to know the truth in certain contexts, so too we have a right not to know it. Provided our ignorance does not harm or seriously endanger others, the decision about whether to know the truth ought to be left to us. Within this limit, therefore, difficult art is morally problematic if it intentionally targets those who have chosen not to know. To illustrate the problem, I discuss the literary writings of Søren Kierkegaard, which aim to deceive readers into seeing unpleasant truths about themselves that they seek to ignore.     

The Art Type Theory of Art

Abstract

The theory I present and defend in this paper—what I term the art type theory— holds that something is a work of art iff it belongs to an established art type. Something is an established art type, in turn, either because its paradigmatic instances standardly satisfy eight art-making conditions, or because the art world has seen fit to enfranchise it as such. It follows that the art status of certain objects is independent of what any individual or culture might say about it, while the art status of others fundamentally depends on the judgment of the art world. Because of the theory's quasi-institutional component, I conclude by defending it against four objections that have been raised against institutional definitions.     

The Filial Art

ABSTRACT Psychological or political criticism of the parent-child relation presupposes a normative account of that relation. Such an account is here provided. The normative account can shed most light when the parent-child relation is presented recognizably, not in Utopian disguise. The purposes of reasonable people partly depend on their interpretations of those of their parents. This is so whether such people accept or reject any particular parental purposes. The filial art sticks to the project of working out the enacted interpretation—until it gets it approximately right. There is a corresponding parental art, neither compensatory nor sacrificial.     

The Cultural Definition of Art

Most modern definitions of art fail to successfully address the issue of the ever‐changing nature of art, and rarely even attempt to provide an account that would be valid in more than just the modern Western context. This article develops a new theory that preserves the advantages of its predecessors, solves or avoids their problems, and has a scope wide enough to account for art of different times and cultures. It argues that an object is art in a given context iff some person(s) culturally competent in this context have afforded it the status of a candidate for appreciation for reasons considered good in this context. This weakly institutional view is supplemented by auxiliary definitions explaining the notions of cultural contexts, competence, and good reasons for affording the status. The relativisation to contexts brings increased explanatory power and scope, and the ability to account for the diversity of art.     

The Art of Bridging Revisited

The importance of connecting group member to member is highlighted in this article. Basically, its value is in finding creative ways to join members together. The article highlights the importance of emotional communication. I look at similarities with other group therapists, particularly exploring those between Ormont and Yalom. It is the goal of this article to highlight how this technique can be of importance for all group therapists. Clinical examples of connecting members from beginning to intermediate and advanced levels are highlighted. A selected literature review is included.     

The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God

Books reviewed: D. Z. Phillips, The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God (London: SCM Press, 2004). xxiii + 280 , price £19.99 pb.
Reviewed by Patrick Sherry, Lancaster University
Religious Studies Department
Lancaster University
Lancaster LA1 4YG     

The Problem of Consciousness

This paper attempts to begin to answer four questions. 1. What is consciousness? 2. What is the relation of consciousness to the brain? 3. What are some of the features that an empirical theory of consciousness should try to explain? 4. What are some common mistakes to avoid?     

相对主义的问题

相对主义有多种,并且不同的作者把相对主义与实在论、客观主义、基础主义、理性主义、绝对主义、普遍主义做各种各样的对比。本文区分有关相对主义的语义学概念和认识论概念,考察了跨文化的相对主义和跨理论的相对主义的各种主张,对局部合理性和全局合理性观点做了比较研究,从维特根斯坦的“生活形式”概念出发,为温和的相对主义提供了论证。     

The Donkey Problem

The Donkey Problem (as I am calling it) concerns the relationship between more and less fundamental ontologies. I will claim that the moral to draw from the Donkey Problem is that the less fundamental objects are merely conventional. This conventionalism has consequences for the 3D/4D debate. Four-dimensionalism is motivated by a desire to avoid coinciding objects, but once we accept that the non-fundamental ontology is conventional there is no longer any reason to reject coincidence. I therefore encourage 4Dists to become even more radical—embrace the Donkey Problem’s conventionalism and deflate the debate between 3Dists and 4Dists.