Page 45 - Studio International - May 1971

interpretation. Every individual, i.e. every —all that sculpture and stuff.) theories might deal with the same phenomena
`experience', would be represented on the map Thinking about correlations existing —and utility might just be determined by the
by a point and those points that correspond to between an extensionally based theory and the purely pragmatical criterion of simplicity, or a
individuals linked by the relation in question problems of naturalism draws attention, as a belief in 'shift', etc. Mach, Poincaré, etc., in the
would be connected by an arrow. The point is matter of criticism, to a (quasi-ontological) philosophy of science have stressed that
that the individuals on such a map are theory which is not just extensionally based. arbitrary stipulations have to be made which
characterized solely by their relative position The problem may be to examine the are neither confirmed nor falsified by experience.
within the network as a whole—and the relation Kantian doctrine of 'objects' (extensionally One is then at the position of being able to say
is accessible only in terms of the structural conceived) (e.g. Theories of Ethics at one that every theoretical statement (every art
form of the network. `level' in III) as a priori intuition (Anschauung). language statement) is a fusion of two
The question is raised whether the individuals One might explicitly refer to Husserl and his components : I. the data of experience and 2. a
are characterized solely in terms of their `intuition of universal essences' ... As Husserl chosen form. One needs a principle of tolerance
topological position within the structural form may have shown, the concern could well be not perhaps; and to accept its 'recoil' (in the sense
of the relation. To answer this in the affirmative with facts in the sense of facts of empirical of Max Weber). It may be argued that one needs
would be to say that the basic relation can be reality but with the eidos of specific data. Apart here the old distinction between theory
unambiguously characterized by its structural from having to face the objections that the contexts and, as it were, spectatorial contexts.
form in the network 'picture'. whole analytic-synthetic distinction is a One might argue that the spectator theory,
As a basic relation, the one in question pragmatically based courtesy with no sharp rather than the art theory, be nominalistic and
orders the domain of a very large domain of dividing lines, there may be some defence of the finite—the theory might be platonistic. This
individuals—it would seem likely, therefore distinction (cf. Kosuth). calls in question the directness or otherwise of
that every individual is characterized by a Though it might be claimed that a theory of the interpretation of the theory or theories.
unique relative position in the total intensional objects enables one to 'understand The suggestion is that 'metaphysical'
configuration. The point is that for every in some way' the sentences of a theory of art. It criticism might be pre- and intra-hermeneutical
relation one can stipulate a whole series of might be argued that the intensional object as well as just a ceteris paribus — a priori.
equally structured isomorphic relations. One postulates of that theory are not based on a The view of theory that will be called
can get new relations by transformation which phenomenological analysis of the intensional `atomistic' holds that a simple theoretical
are not at all experienceable. The requirement content of the `given'—they may be merely configuration corresponds to the configuration
of experience is just legislation from the point representations of conventions regarding the of elements in a state of affairs. The question of
of view of wanting the relation well founded. use of terms and thus represent a possibility of intensions arises in two cases—in the case of
This involves referring to the intensional determination. The point is that one can only well-founded relations and in the case of
content of the relation represented with some oddness refuse to go all the way with synonymy (in theory):
—stipulating, in the semantics spirit, that it intensional objects and admit some at least into An art theory may be committed to a basis of a
must be simple and intuitive. This brings one the ontological commitment of that theory. One domain of individuals ordered by a single
to the point that the mere fact of the existence way one might refuse would be to be wholly primitive (unanalysed) relation and still avoid
of the individuals means that all their concerned with a transition from some 'natural restrictively narrow schemata. This would
configurations are realized in some sense. context' to some explicit system : they are close involve a methodological solipsism. One may
Only if 'intensional objects' are taken into together—metaphysically homogeneous. make the assumption that the unanalysed
consideration (however anachronistic that Explication is largely `subjective'—the point is relation may be given through a list of its
seems) do some configurations become more that this explication might be relativized to the instances — i.e. a list of all pairs of experiences
dramatically accessible than others. disposition of theoretician (`artist' perhaps) 'X'. between which a relation of recognition of
If this is the case, how can one regard a state This corresponds to the classical notion (or similarity holds.
of affairs as a mere configuration of objects and perhaps the conventional notion) of an
nevertheless think that it 'can exist' or 'not intension. But so far, the notions of the II
exist' ? It seems that the distinction between properties of a thing have not been analysed It is appropriate to try to deal with semantic
existing and non-existing states of affairs can very fully. issues here without confusing them with
only be maintained if the relation of Opting for a positivistic point of view, psychological ones. This is one way of seeing
configuration is not merely regarded as haunted by the technological cosmology which what can be done with naturalism. It would be
something one makes reference to but also as entertains its formulations of notions like those also inappropriate to invest this (at this moment)
having an intensional dimension. On some of 'progress' and development, etc., one with any aesthetical prescription.
views, this intensional content might just be explication may be preferable to another if it Any prospective theory of art would be beset
physical spatiality. A particular physical proves more useful—this sees one's explication of by an inadequate analysis if that analysis were
spatial configuration may not exist, even if the `art object' and sculpture, painting etc. as well as based on psychologism. One consequence of
individual objects exist; the existence of one certain contentual aspects as a matter of progress this inadequacy in the past has been the
physical spatial configuration precludes the (or dialectical shift) in the explicit conventions theoretical overvaluating of psychology. The
simultaneous existence of a different spatial (of the theory in question). That is, if you just point is that any reduction of an analysis of art
physical configuration of the same 'objects'. go this far. It might be mentioned that, as it to psychological contexts presupposes the
This way of showing that someone wanted were, slowly, certain properties were selected as weltanschauung of epistemology in the grand
to develop a theory (perhaps like Bochner essential or at least as sine qua non for various Cartesian/Lockean sense. Historically,
et. al.) which was only based extensionally, forms of sculpture etc. One could be sceptical Husserl's phenomenology and Moore's
must nonetheless presuppose the existence of with respect to the possibility of an immediate `analysis' got rid of 'epistemology'.
`intensions' as important in some ways, since it intuition of the essential connections. In semantic/semiotic contexts (i.e. here) one
is the attempt to think out the extensionalist art In order to explain why it may be repellent can make, following Frege, a fourfold
theory (art) view that leads to the idea that this in a context like this to accept 'abstract distinction (this is, however, to pay no
view is untenable. (This view (i.e. the extensional entities' (and stay with the real—to some extent, lip-service to Frege). Now this analysis will
one) holds that there aren't any but extensional anyway), one would need to look at the tradition work quite well for the 'object' theory relation
objects admissable into the art domain. It may of this positivistic point of view. It might be and for the assertoric content of the object
be said to be the logical heir to 'minimal art' argued that a number of mutually irreconcileable context. A semiotic element (in theory) (and
227