Plato, on the other hand, agrees that reality cannot be represented; therefore, 'mimesis' is misrepresentation of truth.
Aristotle becomes the defender of 'mimesis' against Plato and develops a theory of art with reference to 'mimesis' and claims that art (mimetic art) is superior to philosophy and history..
As opposed to Plato, Aristotle argues that art is neither political nor moral.
Only on this condition does art have to do with human behaviour and knowledge.
In other words, art can show reality from a perspective and under a light that we cannot find in our chaotic, random, everyday life..
That being the case, art is twice removed from reality, as it is just an imitation of an imitation: a painting of a chair is an imitation of a chair which is in turn an imitation of the Form of Chair..
A work of art is an imitation of reality.
The artist paints a table and makes a copy of a material table which is already a copy of the immaterial form.
The work of art is a copy of a copy, it is two times removed from reality, and is therefore a deception.
Works of art deceive and artists are deceivers..
According to Aristotle a work of art is not only a technical question: he thinks of the work of art as a structured whole.
Only as a “structured whole” can a work of art relate to human emotional experience and knowledge.
Art imitates nature, but differently from the way Plato intended it..
Plato and Aristotle spoke of mimesis as the re-presentation of nature.
According to Plato, all artistic creation is a form of imitation: that which really exists (in the “world of ideas”) is a type created by God; the concrete things man perceives in his existence are shadowy representations of this ideal type..
He saw art as a way to improve society, and he believed that through art, we can gain insights into human nature and learn how to be better citizens.
Aristotle also felt that art can be used to inspire admiration for beauty and virtue..
According to Plato, art is false knowledge of reality.
An artist's imitation can deceive common people, not the philosopher, who knows the essence of reality or the real being of things..
In his theory of Mimesis, Plato says that all art is mimetic by nature; art is an imitation of life.
He believed that 'idea' is the ultimate reality.
Art imitates idea and so it is imitation of reality.
He gives an example of a carpenter and a chair..
In the Republic, Plato says that art imitates the objects and events of ordinary life.
In other words, a work of art is a copy of a copy of a Form.
It is even more of an illusion than is ordinary experience.
On this theory, works of art are at best entertainment, and at worst a dangerous delusion..
According to Plato, art is false knowledge of reality.
An artist's imitation can deceive common people, not the philosopher, who knows the essence of reality or the real being of things..
According to Plato, art is false knowledge of reality.
An artist's imitation can deceive common people, not the philosopher, who knows the essence of reality or the real being of things..
Plato was deeply suspicious of arts and artists for two reasons: they appeal to the emotion rather than the rational faculty of men and they imitate than lead one to reality.
Plato is critical of he effect of art, specifically, poetry to the people of ideal state..
The "badness" of these hoary conceptions of science and art is contained above all in theoutmoded conceptions of objectivity which characterize them.
One of the reasons, then, that the modern artist, unlike his early nineteenth-century counterpart, refuses to ad- mit a common cause with the modern historian is thathe rightly sees the his- torian as the custodian of an antiquated notion of what art is. In fact, when many contemporary historians speak of the "art" of history,
It is argued that modern thinking is unclear over the nature of art: in particular, as to whether we should grant it the kind of ethical value and cognitive seriousness that Plato faults it for not having, or whether we should defend art's autonomy on the grounds of its providing aesthetic value.
Anti-intellectualism is hostility to and mistrust of intellect, intellectuals, and intellectualism, commonly expressed as deprecation of education and philosophy and the dismissal of art, literature, and science as impractical, politically motivated, and even contemptible human pursuits. Anti-intellectuals present themselves and are perceived as champions of common folk—popul…
Read moreNew content will be added above the current area of focus upon selection