Why study of Economy hsitory is important and why it has privilages Essay

Why study of Economy hsitory is important and why it has privilages U.S.Social or International history - Essay ExampleIn addition, the lack of experience has led to fundamental errors and omissions caused in the present times. Furthermore, the study of economy history is important as it allows the students to understand how the economic and the non-economic facts are related to to one another. In summary, the importance of economy history study is that it is an excellent economic foundation and base for those who study it.Economic history has significant privileges in the U.S International History. It provides modern day students and scholars with a background of understanding the economic events that have shaped the U.S. history. For instance, the modern economic student cannot explain the 2008-2009 economic crisis without privileged understanding of the Great economic depression that occurred in 1929. Nevertheless, economic history addresses the gains the U.S economy contributed to the world. For example, the innovations in transport that included the steam engine revolutionized the movement of goods and people. Fast, streamlined and easy movement of goods by railroad bolstered trade not only domestically but also internationally (Cameron and Neal,

The First Persian Gulf War Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

The First Persian Gulf War - Essay ExampleThe master(prenominal) battles were aerial and ground combat within Iraq, Kuwait, and bordering areas of Saudi Arabia. The war did not expand outside the immediate Iraq/Kuwait/Saudi border region, although Iraq fired missiles on Israeli cities.The Iraqi seizure of Kuwait was of immediate interest to the western capitalist societies because Iraq and Kuwait together would require approximately 20 percent of the worlds know oil reserves (Kellner 9). With the potential wealth generated from future oil sales and control over oil prices, Saddam Hussein could play a study role on the worlds political and economic stage. Consequently, Iraqs invasion of Kuwait produced a crisis for the world capitalist system, for U.S. and European economic interests, and for the stability of the Middle East. Iraq was not capable to get control of Kuwaiti investments because much of their money had been transferred out of the country. Yet, rather than encouraging a diplomatic solution to the crisis that would return Kuwaits sovereignty and secure the region, George provide responded with a military intervention, which inexorably led to the Gulf war itself.Interest in the crisis increased when the U.S. claimed that Iraq might also invade Saudi Arabia, which was said to control 20 percent of the worlds known oil reserves and an investment portfolio even larger than Kuwaits. George Bush, who had initially attacked the invasion as naked aggression, heated up his elaborateness and declared on August 5 that the invasion would not stand. Two days later, he sent thousands of troops to Saudi Arabia. The Bush administration had so set the stage for the Gulf war by failing to warn Iraq of the consequences of invading Kuwait and then by quickly sending troops to Saudi Arabia while undercutting diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis (Frank 20).There was no single reason why the United States relentlessly pursued the military option in the crisis of the Gulf. Dissection of the primal forces that led the Bush administration to pursue the war option reveals a complex web of political, economic, and military considerations. The Gulf war was not solely a war for oil, for the greater glory of George Bush and the Pentagon, or for the promotion of U.S. geopolitical supremacy in order to bolster a faltering U.S. economy, although all of these factors compete a role in producing the war. Instead, the Gulf war was overdetermined and requires a multicausal analysis (Kellner 11-12).In 1990, Bushs presidency was facing severe domestic economic and political problems, including a sky-rocketing deficit caused by Reagans and Bushs astronomical defense-spending a severe S&L, banking, and insurance crisis caused by Republican deregulation policies and proliferating public squalor marked by exploitation homelessness, unemployment, economic deprivation, deteriorating cities with epidemics of crime and drugs, health problems such as AIDS, cancer , and the absence of a national health insurance program. These and many other problems were in part caused, or aggravated, by the policies of George Bush and his predecessor Ronald Reagan. Consequently, it was in George Bushs interest to divert attention from current crises and the potentially deteriorating economy with a scapegoat for the economic imbroglio produced by Republican economics. That is, Bush could claim that the economic problems were caused by Saddam Husseins invasion of Kuwait and the ensuing crisis that drove up

QUESTION SET Movie Review Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

QUESTION SET - Movie Review ExampleThe stage would change drastically if told by someone else other than Martha since they do not understand the real hardships due to lack of contact with the women. This would overshadow the real struggles of women.Things odd behind provide evidence of the living conditions during a historical period (Richard, 1997). They help us understand the experiences through reconnection. An example is Marthas diary helps us to see her world and make a film depicting her life and experiences as a midwife.Other remote issues such as religious conflicts touch the ordinary lives of people. They reduced interactions among community members sharing differences in this remote factors. As a result, racism becomes an issue and an ordinary way of life making it difficult for ordinary people to relate with those of opposite race. Racism is seen as big issue at the time when mothers states she uses the same speed and skill to deliver whitened women and black women pr oving race was there but she did not let it affect her (Richard, 1997).The movie helps us understand the struggles faced by women during the post-revolutionary period. It helps to shed light on medical practices, religious animosity and sexual roles in the 18th century. These issues still affect us right now and, therefore, the movie can help individuals see this issues and address them

Readers response Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Readers response - Essay ExampleThe term coy informs the lector that the young woman is non an easy catch. In other words, she is not easily carried away. Besides suggesting that the word coy could mean a sweetheart or a buffer, it could also be the equivalent for a lady, manager or a courtesan.The lady in To His Coy Mistress plays a frame of a cat and mouse game with her suitor in being shy and artfully demure and at the same time being playfully hesitant. She is well aware that the young mans motivation is more of a carnal desire for her than true love. He urges her time and again to hold up advantage of the moment saying sport us while we may telling her that dallying was not a good idea because jejuneness passes quickly. He presses his geek on telling her that the luxury of time is not with them for times winged chariot is ever racing along and before they realize it, youth would have passed them by and only their graves would remain.From the ladys point of view, it is un derstood that her lover is not motivated by true love but by sheer carnal desire for her. She doesnt seem to want to succumb to his charms and passion. Though her lover seems impatient and desperate, yet she does not relent. Though the lover suggests that time and their youth is passing them by and they should take advantage and enjoy the pleasure of each other presently, yet she stalls on this fact and does not want to give into his passions. The silent female in this poem tries to be quite tolerant to her suitor and does not encourage his advances. She seems to be somewhat lovesick and dejected by the fact that his key motivation behind his advances is not that of love but of lust or carnal desire and passion. She would rather pick that his desire for her would be centered on pure love than on fleeting passions.This beautiful poem by Andrew Marvell To His Coy Mistress has both rasping and shocking imagery and gross

The Effect of Selective Loggin on Bird Population Essay

The Effect of Selective Loggin on Bird Population - Essay ExampleRobinson and Robinson examined the effect of selective logging within a southern Illinois forest in the United States. In their study, the authors compared the abundance of birds within uncut areas of the forest compared to areas where cutting had occurred recently (1 to 5 years before the experiment) or historically (10 to 15 years prior). The prevalence of birds was determined using a count system, where researchers spent six minutes at each post and record the number of birds that were observed or heard. Observation points were allocated along a transect line at 150 metre intervals. The authors determined that for most species, there was no monumental difference of bird abundance between cut and non-cut areas. Only two species were significantly less common in cut areas than in non-cut areas. These were the Red-eyed Vireo and the Ovenbird. However, the nest predator, the downcast Jay, had a significantly higher pre valence in cut areas than in non-cut areas. The study was well designed, and the authors took into account a number of potentially confounding effects, such(prenominal) as observer bias and overlapping observations between the different posts. The authors also examined the power of their statistical tests, and were able to test whether there were significant differences between a large number of different bird species. One limitation of this study was that both control and experiment aspects of the study occurred within the same forest, with the authors using unlogged move of the forest as the control. This makes it difficult to determine whether the trends that were observed are specific to the forest studied, or they occur widely. A study also published in 1999 also examined how selective logging affected the bird community. This study took place in a Brazilian Atlantic forest. The author chose two nearby sites, one had experienced selective logging and the other had not. The ar eas were tested for a number of factors including vegetation structure and measures of the diversity and richness of the bird species that were present, as well as the composition of species. The author determined that diversity and richness of the bird species did not vary between sites, however, which species were present and which were absent, differed considerably. Like the first study, the author made ingestion of spot-counts to determine the abundance of bird species. This study was not powerful, as only two areas of forest were examined, one control (no logging) and one experimental (selective logging). Consequently, there was no replication, and it is difficult to extrapolate from the results of this study to general conclusions. Additionally, the lack of replication made it difficult to test whether the observed results differed significantly between the two areas. Thus, although the study shows that selective logging is having a negative effect on some species, there is n ot enough information to determine whether this is because of selective logging, or because of the particular sites elect for the study. A final study on selective logging examined this in an Indonesian forest. Observations were taken from a number of stations, each of which was classified as having been logged in the previous six years, or as not having been logged. There was a significantly higher number of birds at the non-logged site than at the logged site, suggesting that logging lessen the abundance of species .

Departments Differ from People-Oriented Departments Essay Example for Free

Departments Differ from People-Oriented Departments EssayThere are a number of inconsistencys between action-oriented and people-oriented HRM subdivisions. One of the most distinctive differences lays in the improvement that each of the different methods take to the role of human resources. Its important to note that a considerably HRM department is both people and action-oriented. An action-oriented HRM is one that seeks to further the make-up by solving problems through taking actions. These actions are typically resolved based on a set of rational actions and not on a set of strict policies and procedures. The action-oriented department is all about people and how the HRM department can work to solve the problems of those individuals. An example would be an HRM team that has a recruiting department that is focused simply on bringing in new individuals to the organization. The lack of standard record keeping doesnt mean that adequate records are not unploughed it simply means that the department is focused primarily on progress and not on procedures.An example of a company that falls under an action-oriented HRM is Exxon Mobile. The difference in the people-oriented HRM department is that the entire focus of the HR team is on the individual and how those individuals can benefit the organization. It takes a slightly different approach as it is more proactive than reactive. The reason is that a people-oriented HRM department focuses on the talents and skills of individuals in the organization and how those skills can best be used in the organization.By twin(a) employees and skills to problems that must be addressed within the organization the HRM team serves to provide a strategic advantage in that HRM is leading rather than simply transaction with reactionary problems or employees who may be unhappy in their current roles. An example of people-oriented HRM is the assessment of individual skills by which assignments testament be presented. A good c ompany example of people-oriented HRM is Apple Computer. While both methods are valid they do take a different approach to how HRM is handled.The method that is used will be determined by the senior HRM director which will set the role of HRM and how it will be managed in the individual organization. Finally, it should be noted that action-oriented and people-oriented HRM are not mutually exclusive and some organizations may function better with one method over another depending on the type of business.

Art After Philosophy (1969) Joseph Kosuth Essay Example for Free

Art After Philosophy (1969) Joseph Kosuth Es verbalizeThe occurrence that it has recently become fashionable for physicists themselves to be sympathetic toward religion . . . attach the physicists own lack of confidence in the validity of t inheritor hypotheses, which is a reaction on their p craft from the anti spiritual dogmatism of nineteenth-century scientists, and a natural knocked out(p)come of the crisis through which physics has just passed. A. J. Ayer. . . . once one and only(a) has understood the Tractatus at that place will be no temptation to concern oneself anymore with philosophical system, which is neither empirical like in take ination nor tautological like mathematics one will, like Wittgenstein in 1918, abandon philosophy, which, as custom altogethery understood, is rooted in confusion. J. O. Urmson.Traditional philosophy, al approximately by definition, has concerned itself with the unsaid. The nearly exclusive focus on the said by twentieth-century analytical linguistic philosophers is the shargond contention that the unsaid is unsaid because it is un eitheregeable. Hegelian philosophy make intelligence in the nineteenth century and must get to been soothing to a century that was b arly getting over Hume, the Enlightenment, and Kant.1 Hegels philosophy was in addition capable of giving cover for a defense of religious beliefs, supplying an alternative to Newtonian mechanics, and fitting in with the growth of history as a discipline, as well as accepting Darwinian biology.2 He appe bed to give an acceptable resolution to the conflict between theology and cognition, as well. The result of Hegels influence has been that a wide majority of contemporary philosophers are really little more than historians of philosophy, Librarians of the Truth, so to let out. unrivaled begins to get the impression that there is zip fastener more to be said. And veritablely if one realizes the implications of Wittgensteins thought process, and the thinking influenced by him and after him, Continental philosophy need not seriously be considered here.3 Is there a reason for the unreality of philosophy in our time? Perhaps this toilette be answered by looking into the difference between our time and the centuries forward us. In the bypast slices conclusions some the world were based on the information he had about it if not specifically like the empiricists, hence generally like the rationalists.Often in fact, the closeness between science and philosophy was so great that scientists and philosophers were one and the same person. In fact, from the times of Thales, Epicurus, Heraclitus, and Aristotle to Desc devicees and Leibnitz, the great names in philosophy were often great names in science as well.4 That the world as perceived by twentieth-century science is a vastly different one than the one of its preceding century, need not be proved here.Is it possible, then, that in effect man has learned so some(prenomi nal), and his intelligence is much(prenominal), that he cannot believe the reasoning of handed-down philosophy? That perhaps he k right offs too much about the world to make those kinds of conclusions? As Sir crowd Jeans has conjure upd . . . When philosophy has availed itself of the results of science, it has not been by borrowing the abstract mathematical description of the pattern of chargets, solely by borrowing the then current graphic description of this pattern thus it has not appropriated certain knowledge but conjectures. These conjectures were often good enough for the man-sized world, but not, as we now know, for those supreme processes of nature which control the happenings of the man-sized world, and bring us nearest to the true nature of reality.5He continuesOne consequence of this is that the standard philosophical discussions of many problems, such(prenominal) as those of causality and free will orof materialism or mentalism, are based on an interpretation of the pattern of events which is no longer tenable. The scientific infrastructure of these older discussions has been washed a path, and with their disappearance have gone all the arguments . . .6The twentieth century brought in a time that could be called the end of philosophy and the commencement exercise of maneuver. I do not mean that, of course, strictly speaking, but rather as the tendency of the situation. Certainly linguistic philosophy can be considered the heir to empiricism, but its a philosophy in one gear.7 And there is certainly an ruseistic production control to wile take preceding Duchamp, but its opposite functions or reasons-to-be are so pronounced that its ability to function understandably as graphics limits its imposture condition so drastically that its only minimally device.8 In no mechanistic sense is there a connection between philosophys ending and tricks get, but I dont acquire this occurrence entirely coincidental. Though the same reasons may be responsible for both occurrences, the connection is made by me.I bring this all up to fail dodges function and subsequently its viability. And I do so to enable new(prenominal)s to understand the reasoning of my and, by extension, other fine artificers art, as well to provide a clearer understanding of the term Conceptual art.9 THE FUNCTION OF ART The main qualifications to the lesser position of pictorial matter is that advances in art are certainly not almodal values formal ones. Donald Judd (1963). Half or more of the best radical name in the cash in ones chips few years has been neither painting nor sculpture. Donald Judd (1965). E reallything sculpture has, my represent doesnt. Donald Judd (1967). The idea becomes a machine that makes the art. Sol LeWitt (1965) The one thing to say about art is that it is one thing. Art is art-as-art and everything else is everything else. Art as art is nothing but art.Art is not what is not art. Ad Reinhardt (1963). The meanin g is the use. Wittgenstein. A more practiseing(a) approach to the study of constructs has tended to replace the method of introspection. Instead of attempting to grasp or describe concepts bare, so to speak, the psychologist investigates the focus in which they function as ingredients in beliefs and in judgments. Irving M. Copi. Meaning is always a presupposition of function. T. Segerstedt. . . . the subject matter of conceptual investigations is the meaning of certain words and expressions and not the things and states of affairs themselves about which we talk, when using those words and expressions. G. H. Von Wright. thought process is radically metaphorical. Linkage by analogy is its constituent law or principle, its causal nexus, since meaning only arises through the causal stage settings by which a gull stands for (takes the place of) an in locating of a sort. To think of anything is to take it as of a sort (as a such and such) and that as brings in (openly or in disguis e) the analogy, the parallel, the metaphoric grapple or ground or grasp or draw by which alone the mind takes hold. It takes no hold if there is nothing for it to arrest from, for its thinking is the haul, the attraction of likes I. A. Richards.In this section I will discuss the separation between estheticals and art consider briefly formalist art (because it is a winding proponent of the idea of aesthetics as art), and assert that art is analogous to an analytic overture, and that it is arts existence as a redundancy that enables art to remain aloof from philosophical presumptions. It is necessary to recount aesthetics from art because aesthetics deals with opinions on perception of the world in general. In the past one of the two prongs of arts function was its appreciate as decoration. So any branch of philosophy that dealt with beauty and thus, taste, was inevitably duty bank to discuss art as well. Out of this habit grew the notion that there was a conceptual connectio n between art and aesthetics, which is not true.This idea neer drastically conflicted with artistic considerations before recent times, not only because the morphological characteristics of art perpetuated the continuity of this error, but as well, because the apparent other functions of art (depiction of religious themes, portraiture of aristocrats, detailing of architecture, etc.) used art to cover up art. When objects are presented within the context of art (and until recently objects always have been used) they are as eligible for aesthetic consideration as are any objects in the world, and an aesthetic consideration of an object existing in the realm of art nub that the objects existence or functioning in an art context is irrelevant to the aesthetic judgment. The relation of aesthetics to art is not distant that of aesthetics to architecture, in that architecture has a very specific function and how good its design is is primarily associate to how well it performs its func tion.Thus, judgments on what it looks like gibe to taste, and we can see that throughout history different examples of architecture are praised at different times depending on the aesthetics of position epochs. esthetic thinking has even gone so further nigh as to make examples of architecture not related to art at all, workings of art in themselves (e.g., the pyramids of Egypt). Aesthetic considerations are indeed always extraneous to an objects function or reason-tobe. Unless of course, that objects reason-to-be is strictly aesthetic.An example of a purely aesthetic object is a decorative object, for decorations primary function is to add almostthing to, so as to make more attractive adorn ornament,10 and this relates directly to taste. And this leads us directly to formalist art and criticism.11 Formalist art (painting and sculpture) is the vanguard of decoration, and, strictly speaking, one could reasonably assert that its art condition is so minimal that for all functional purposes it is not art at all, but pure exercises in aesthetics. Above all things Clement Greenberg is the critic of taste. Behind every one of his decisions is an aesthetic judgment, with those judgments reflecting his taste. And what does his taste reflect? The period he grew up in as a critic, the period real for him the fifties.12How else can one account for, given his theories if they have any logic to them at all his disinterest in Frank Stella, Ad Reinhardt, and others applicable to his historical scheme? Is it because he is . . . basically unsympathetic on personally experiential grounds?13 Or, in other words, their work doesnt suit his taste? But in the philosophic tabula rasa of art, if soulfulness calls it art, as Don Judd has said, its art. Given this, formalist painting and sculpture can be granted an art condition, but only by virtue of their presentment in terms of their art idea (e.g., a rectangular-shaped canvas stretched over wooden supports and stained with s uch and such colors, using such and such forms, giving such and such a opthalmic experience, etc.). If one looks at contemporary art in this light one realizes the minimal creative effort taken on the part of formalist artists specifically, and all painters and sculptors (working as such today) generally.This brings us to the realization that formalist art and criticism accepts as a definition of art one that exists solo on morphological grounds. While a vast standard of similar looking objects or images (or visually related objects or images) may seem to be related (or connected) because of a similarity of visual/experiential readings, one cannot claim from this an artistic or conceptual relationship. It is obvious then that formalist criticisms reliance on word structure leads inevitably with a bias toward the morphology of traditional art. And in this sense their criticism is not related to a scientific method or any sort of empiricism (as Michael Fried, with his detailed de scriptions of paintings and other scholarly paraphernalia would want us to believe).Formalist criticism is no more than an analysis of the physical attributes of particular objects that happen to exist in a morphological context. But this doesnt add any knowledge (or facts) to our understanding of the nature or function of art. And neither does it comment on whether or not the objects analyzed are even works of art, in that formalist critics always bypass the conceptual element in works of art. Exactly why they dont comment on the conceptual element in works of art is precisely because formalist art is only art by virtue of its resemblance to earlier works of art. Its a mindless art. Or, as Lucy Lippard so succinctly described Jules Olitskis paintings theyre visual Muzak.14 Formalist critics and artists alike do not question the nature of art, but as I have said elsewhere Being an artist now means to question the nature of art. If one is questioning the nature of painting, one canno t be questioning the nature of art. If an artist accepts painting (or sculpture) he is accepting the tradition that goes with it. Thats because the word art is general and the word painting is specific. Painting is a kind of art. If you make paintings you are already accepting (not questioning) the nature of art. One is then accepting the nature of art to be the European tradition of a painting-sculpture dichotomy.15The strongest objection one can raise against a morphological confession for traditional art is that morphological notions of art embody an implied a priori concept of arts possibilities. And such an a priori concept of the nature of art (as separate from analytically framed art propositions or work, which I will discuss later) makes it, indeed, a priori impossible to question the nature of art. And this questioning of the nature of art is a very important concept in understanding the function of art.The function of art, as a question, was first raised by Marcel Duchamp . In fact it is Marcel Duchamp whom we can credit with giving art its own identity. (One can certainly see a tendency toward this self-identification of art beginning with Manet and Czanne through to Cubism,16 but their works are timid and ambiguous by comparison with Duchamps.) Modern art and the work before seemed connected by virtue of their morphology. other way of putting it would be that arts language remained the same, but it was saying new things. The event that made conceivable the realization that it was possible to speak another language and still make sense in art was Marcel Duchamps first unassisted Ready-made. With the unassisted Ready-made, art changed its focus from the form of the language to what was universe said. Which means that it changed the nature of art from a question of morphology to a question of function.This change one from appearance to conception was the beginning of modern art and the beginning of conceptual art. All art (after Duchamp) is concep tual (in nature) because art only exists conceptually. The value of particular artists after Duchamp can be weighed accord to how much they questioned the nature of art which is another way of saying what they added to the conception of art or what wasnt there before they started. Artists question the nature of art by presenting new propositions as to arts nature. And to do this one cannot concern oneself with the handed-down language of traditional art, as this activity is based on the assumption that there is only one way of framing art propositions. But the very stuff of art is indeed greatly related to creating new propositions.The case is often made particularly in reference to Duchamp that objects of art (such as the Ready-mades, of course, but all art is implied in this) are judged as objets dart in later years and the artists intentions become irrelevant. Such an argument is the case of a preconceived notion ordering together not necessarily related facts. The point is th is aesthetics, as we have pointed out, are conceptually irrelevant to art. Thus, any physical thing can become objet dart, that is to say, can be considered tasteful, aesthetically pleasing, etc. But this has no bearing on the objects application to an art context that is, its functioning in an art context. (E.g., if a collector takes a painting, attaches legs, and uses it as a dining table its an act unrelated to art or the artist because, as art, that wasnt the artists intention.) And what holds true for Duchamps work applies as well to most of the art after him. In other words, the value of Cubism for instance is its idea in the realm of art, not the physical or visual qualities seen in a specific painting, or the particularization of certain colors or shapes.For these colors and shapes are the arts language, not its meaning conceptually as art. To look upon a Cubist masterwork now as art is nonsensical, conceptually speaking, as far as art is concerned. (That visual informatio n that was unique in Cubisms language has now been generally absorbed and has a lot to do with the way in which one deals with painting linguistically. E.g., what a Cubist painting meant experimentally and conceptually to, say, Gertrude Stein, is beyond our speculation because the same painting then meant something different than it does now.) The value now of an original Cubist painting is not unlike, in most respects, an original manuscript by Lord Byron, or The Spirit of St. Louis as it is seen in the Smithsonian Institution. (Indeed, museums fill the very same function as the Smithsonian Institution why else would the Jeu de Paume wing of the Louvre exhibitCzannes and Van Goghs palettes as proudly as they do their paintings?) Actual works of art are little more than historical curiosities. As far as art is concerned Van Goghs paintings arent worth any more than his palette is. They are both collectors items.17 Art lives through influencing other art, not by existing as the phys ical residue of an artists ideas. The reason that different artists from the past are brought alive again is because some survey of their work becomes usable by living artists. That there is no truth as to what art is seems quite unrealized. What is the function of art, or the nature of art? If we continue our analogy of the forms art takes as being arts language one can realize then that a work of art is a kind of proposition presented within the context of art as a comment on art. We can then go further and analyze the types of propositions.A. J. Ayers evaluation of Kants distinction between analytic and synthetic is useful to us here A proposition is analytic when its validity depends solely on the definitions of the symbols it contains, and synthetic when its validity is determined by the facts of experience.18 The analogy I will attempt to make is one between the art condition and the condition of the analytic proposition. In that they dont appear to be believable as anything else, or be about anything (other than art) the forms of art most clearly finally referable only to art have been forms closest to analytical propositions. Works of art are analytic propositions. That is, if viewed within their context as art they provide no information whatsoever about any matter of fact. A work of art is a tautology in that it is a presentation of the artists intention, that is, he is saying that that particular work of art is art, which means, is a definition of art.Thus, that it is art is true a priori (which is what Judd means when he states that if someone calls it art, its art). Indeed, it is nearly impossible to discuss art in general terms without talking in tautologies for to attempt to grasp art by any other handle is merely to focus on another aspect or quality of the proposition, which is usually irrelevant to the artworks art condition. One begins to realize that arts art condition is a conceptual state. That the language forms that the artist frame s his propositions in are often private codes or languages is an inevitable outcome of arts freedom from morphological constrictions and it follows from this that one has to be familiar with contemporary art to appreciate it and understand it. Likewise one understands why the man in the street is intolerant to artistic art and always demands art in a traditional language. (And one understands why formalist art sells like hot cakes.)Only in painting and sculpture did the artists all speak the same language. What is called Novelty Art by the formalists is often the attempt to find new languages, although a new language doesnt necessarily mean the framing of new propositions e.g., most kinetic and electronic art. Another way of stating, in relation to art, what Ayer asserted about the analytic method in the context of language would be the following The validity of artistic propositions is not dependent on any empirical, much less any aesthetic, presupposition about the nature of thing s. For the artist, as an analyst, is not directly concerned with the physical properties of things. He is concerned only with the way (1) in which art is capable of conceptual growth and (2) how his propositions are capable of logically following that growth.19 In other words, the propositions of art are not factual, but linguistic in character that is, they do not describe the behavior of physical, or even mental objects they express definitions of art, or the formal consequences of definitions of art.Accordingly, we can say that art operates on a logic. For we shall see that the characteristic mark of a purely logical inquiry is that it is concerned with the formal consequences of our definitions (of art) and not with questions of empirical fact.20 To repeat, what art has in common with logic and mathematics is that it is a tautology i.e., the art idea (or work) and art are the same and can be appreciated as art without going remote the context of art for verification.On the oth er hand, let us consider why art cannot be (or has hindrance when it attempts to be) a synthetic proposition. Or, that is to say, when the truth or falsity of its assertion is verifiable on empirical grounds. Ayer states . . . The criterion by which we determine the validity of an a priori or analytical proposition is not sufficient to determine the validity of an empirical or synthetic proposition. For it is characteristic of empirical propositions that their validity is not purely formal. To say that a geometrical proposition, or a system of geometrical propositions, is false, is to say that it is self-contradictory. But an empirical proposition, or a system of empirical propositions, may be free from contradiction and still be false. It is said to be false, not because it is formally defective, but because it fails to satisfy some material criterion.21The unreality of realistic art is due to its framing as an art proposition in synthetic terms one is always tempted to verify the proposition empirically. Realisms synthetic state does not bring one to a circular swing back into a dialogue with the larger framework of questions about the nature of art (as does the work of Malevich, Mondrian, Pollock, Reinhardt, early Rauschenberg, Johns, Lichtenstein, Warhol, Andre, Judd, Flavin, LeWitt, Morris, and others), but rather, one is flung out of arts orbit into the infinite space of the human condition. Pure Expressionism, continuing with Ayers terms, could be considered as such A sentence which consisted of demonstrative symbols would not express a genuine proposition. It would be a mere ejaculation, in no way characterizing that to which it was supposed to refer.Expressionist works are usually such ejaculations presented in the morphological language of traditional art. If Pollock is important it is because he painted on loose canvas horizontally to the floor. What isnt important is that he later put those drippings over stretchers and hung them parallel to the w all. (In other words what is important in art is what one brings to it, not ones adoption of what was previously existing.) What is even less important to art is Pollocks notions of self-expression because those kinds of subjective meanings are futile to anyone other than those involved with him personally. And their specific quality puts them outside of arts context. I do not make art, Richard Serra says, I am engaged in an activity if someone wants to call it art, thats his business, but its not up to me to decide that. Thats all figured out later. Serra, then, is very much aware of the implications of his work.If Serra is indeed just figuring out what lead does (gravitationally, molecularly, etc.), why should anyone think of it as art? If he doesnt take the responsibility of it being art, who can, or should? His work certainly appears to be empirically verifiable lead can do, and be used for, many physical activities. In itself this does anything but lead us into a dialogue abou t the nature of art. In a sense then he is a primitive. He has no idea about art. How is it then that we know about his activity?Because he has told us it is art by his actions after his activity has taken place. That is, by the fact that he is with several(prenominal) galleries, puts the physical residue of his activity in museums (and sells them to art collectors but as we have pointed out, collectors are irrelevant to the condition of art of a work). That he denies his work is art but plays the artist is more than just a paradox. Serra secretly feels that arthood is arrived at empirically. Thus, as Ayer has stated There are no absolutely certain empirical propositions. It is only tautologies that are certain. Empirical questions are one and all hypotheses, which may be confirmed or discredited in actual sense experience. And the propositions in which we record the observations that verify these hypotheses are themselves hypotheses which are subject to the test of further sense e xperience. Thus there is no final proposition.22What one finds all throughout the writings of Ad Reinhardt is this very similar thesis of artas-art, and that art is always dead, and a living art is a deception.23 Reinhardt had a very clear idea about the nature of art, and his importance is far from recognized. Because forms of art that can be considered synthetic propositions are verifiable by the world, that is to say, to understand these propositions one must leave the tautological-like framework of art and consider outside information. But to consider it as art it is necessary to ignore this same outside information, because outside information (experiential qualities, to note) has its own intrinsic worth. And to comprehend this worth one does not need a state of art condition.From this it is easy to realize that arts viability is not connected to the presentation of visual (or other) kinds of experience. That that may have been one of arts extraneous functions in the preceding centuries is not un believably. After all, man in even the nineteenth century lived in a fairly standardized visual environment. That is, it was ordinarily predictable as to what he would be approach into contact with day after day. His visual environment in the part of the world in which he lived was fairly consistent. In our time we have an experientially drastically richer environment. One can fly all over the earth in a matter of hours and days, not months. We have the cinema, and color television, as well as the man-made spectacle of the lights of Las Vegas or the skyscrapers of New York City.The whole world is there to be seen, and the whole world can watch man walk on the stagnate from their living rooms. Certainly art or objects of painting and sculpture cannot be expected to compete experientially with this? The notion of use is relevant to art and its language. Recently the stroke or cube form has been used a great deal within the context of art. (Take for instance its use by Judd, Morris, LeWitt, Bladen, Smith, Bell, and McCracken not even mentioning the quantity of boxes and cubes that came after.) The difference between all the various uses of the box or cube form is directly related to the differences in the intentions of the artists. Further, as is particularly seen in Judds work, the use of the box or cube form illustrates very well our earlier claim that an object is only art when placed in the context of art.A few examples will point this out. One could say that if one of Judds box forms was seen filled with debris, seen placed in an industrial setting, or even merely seen sitting on a street corner, it would not be identified with art. It follows then that understanding and consideration of it as an artwork is necessary a priori to viewing it in order to see it as a work of art. Advance information about the concept of art and about an artists concepts is necessary to the appreciation and understanding of contemporary art. Any and all of the physical attributes (qualities) of contemporary works, if considered separately and/or specifically, are irrelevant to the art concept. The art concept (as Judd said, though he didnt mean it this way) must be considered in its whole. To consider a concepts parts is invariably to consider aspects that are irrelevant to its art condition or like reading parts of a definition.It comes as no surprise that the art with the least fixed morphology is the example from which we decipher the nature of the general term art. For where there is a context existing separately of its morphology and consisting of its function one is more likely to find results less conforming and predictable. It is in modern arts possession of a language with the shortest history that the plausibility of the abandonment of that language becomes most possible. It is understandable then that the art that came out of Western painting and sculpture is the most energetic, questioning (of its nature), and the least assuming of all the general art concerns. In the final analysis, however, all of the arts have but (in Wittgensteins terms) a family resemblance. Yet the various qualities relatable to an art condition possessed by poetry, the novel, the cinema, the theatre, and various forms of music, etc., is that aspect of them most reliable to the function of art as asserted here.Is not the decline of poetry relatable to the implied metaphysics from poetrys use of common language as an art language?24 In New York the last decadent stages of poetry can be seen in the move by Concrete poets recently toward the use of actual objects and theatre.25 Can it be that they feel the unreality of their art form? We see now that the axioms of a geometry are simply definitions, and that the theorems of a geometry are simply the logical consequences of these definitions. A geometry is not in itself about physical space in itself it cannot be said to be about anything. But we can use a geometry to reason about physical space.That is to say, once we have given the axioms a physical interpretation, we can proceed to apply the theorems to the objects which satisfy the axioms. Whether a geometry can be applied to the actual physical world or not, is an empirical question which falls outside the scope of geometry itself. There is no sense, therefore, in asking which of the various geometries known to us are false and which are true. Insofar as they are all free from contradiction, they are all true. The proposition which states that a certain application of a geometry is possible is not itself a proposition of that geometry. All that the geometry itself tells us is that if anything can be brought under the definitions, it will in any case satisfy the theorems. It is therefore a purely logical system, and its propositions are purely analytic propositions. A. J. Ayer26Here then I propose rests the viability of art. In an age when traditional philosophy is unreal because of its assumptions, art s ability to exist will depend not only on its not performing a avail as entertainment, visual (or other) experience, or decoration which is something easily replaced by kitsch culture, and technology, but, rather, it will remain viable by not assuming a philosophical stance for in arts unique character is the capacity to remain alooffrom philosophical judgments. It is in this context that art shares similarities with logic, mathematics, and, as well, science. But whereas the other determinations are useful, art is not. Art indeed exists for its own sake. In this period of man, after philosophy and religion, art may possibly be one endeavor that fulfills what another age might have called mans spiritual needs. Or, another way of putting it might be that art deals analogously with the state of things beyond physics where philosophy had to make assertions. And arts strength is that even the preceding sentence is an assertion, and cannot be verified by art. Arts only claim is for a rt. Art is the definition of art.NOTES * Reprinted from Studio International (October, 1969). 1 Morton White, The Age of Analysis (New York Mentor Books), p. 14. 2 Ibid., p. 15. 3 I mean by this Existentialism and Phenomenology. Even Merleau-Ponty, with his middle-of-the-road position between empiricism and rationalism, cannot express his philosophy without the use of words (thus using concepts) and following this, how can one discuss experience without sharp distinctions between ourselves and the world? 4 Sir James Jeans, Physics and Philosophy (Ann Arbor, Mich. University of Michigan Press), p. 17. 5 Ibid., p. 190. 6 Ibid., p. 190. 7 The task such philosophy has taken upon itself is the only function it could perform without making philosophic assertions. 8 This is dealt with in the following section. 9 I would like to make it clear, however, that I have in mind to speak for no one else. I arrived at these conclusions alone, and indeed, it is from this thinking that my art since 1966 (if not before) evolved.Only recently did I realize after meeting terrycloth Atkinson that he and Michael Baldwin share similar, though certainly not identical, opinions to mine. 10 Websters New World Dictionary of the American Language. 11 The conceptual level of the work of Kenneth Noland, Jules Olitski, Morris Louis, Ron Davis, Anthony Caro, John Hoyland, Dan Christensen, et al., is so dismally low, that any that is there is supplied by the critics promoting it. This is seen later. 12 Michael Frieds reasons for using Greenbergs rationale reflect his background (and most of the other formalist critics) as a scholar, but more of it is due to his appetite, I suspect, to bring his scholarly studies into the modern world. One can easily sympathize with his desire to connect, say, Tiepolo with Jules Olitski. One should never forget, however, that a historian loves history more than anything, even art.13 Lucy Lippard uses this quotation in a footnote to Ad Reinhardts retro muni ment, January, 1967, p. 28. 14 Lucy Lippard, Constellation by Harsh Daylight The Whitney Annual, Hudson Review, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Spring, 1968). 15 Arthur R. Rose, Four Interviews, Arts Magazine (February, 1969). 16 As Terry Atkinson pointed out in his introduction to Art-Language (Vol. 1, No. 1), the Cubists never questioned if art had morphological characteristics, but which ones in painting were acceptable. 17 When someone buys a Flavin he isnt acquire a light show, for if he was he could just go to a hardware store and get the goods for considerably less. He isnt buying anything. He is subsidizing Flavins activity as an artist. 18 A. J. Ayer, Language, Truth, and Logic (New York Dover Publications), p. 78. 19 Ibid., p. 57.20 Ibid., p. 57. 21 Ibid., p.90. 22 Ibid., p. 94. 23 Ad Reinhardts retrospective catalogue (Jewish Museum, January, 1967) written by Lucy Lippard, p. 12. 24 It is poetrys use of common language to attempt to say the unsayable that is problematic, not any inheren t problem in the use of language within the context of art. 25 Ironically, many of them call themselves Conceptual Poets. Much of this work is very similar to Walter de Marias work and this is not coincidental de Marias work functions as a kind of object poetry, and his intentions are very poetic he really wants his work to change mens lives. 26 Op. cit., p. 82.