Margaret Macdonald on the definition of art

Bibliography

• Adajian, Thomas. “The Definition of Art”. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, 2018. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/art-definition/.
   Google Scholar
• Addis, Mark. “Macdonald, Margaret (1907–1956)”. In Dictionary of Twentieth-Century British Philosophers, edited by Stuart Brown, 1997–2000. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Ambrose, Alice. Wittgenstein’s Lectures, Cambridge, 1932–1935: From the Notes of Alice Ambrose and Margaret Macdonald. London: Rowman & Littlefield, 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Beardsley, Monroe C. “The Definition of the Arts”. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 20, no. 2 (1961): 175–87.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, Clive. Art. London: Chatto and Windus, 1914.
   Google Scholar
• Berleant, Arnold. “A Note on the Problem of Defining ‘Art’”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 25, no. 2 (1964): 239–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brand, Peg Zeglin. “Glaring Omissions in Traditional Theories of Art”. In Theories of Art Today, edited by Noël Carroll, 175–98. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Lee B. “Definitions and Art Theory”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 27, no. 4 (1969): 409–16.
   Google Scholar
• Brunius, Teddy. “The Uses of Works of Art”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 22, no. 2 (1965): 123–34.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, Noël. Philosophy of Art: A Contemporary Introduction. London: Routledge, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, Noël. “Introduction”. In Theories of Art Today, edited by Noël Carroll, 3–24. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, Marshall. “Aesthetic Essence”. In Philosophy in America, edited by Max Black, 114–32. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1965.
   Google Scholar
• Collingwood, R. G. Outline of a Philosophy of Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1925.
   Google Scholar
• Connell, Sophia M., and Frederique Janssen-Lauret. “Lost Voices: On Counteracting Exclusion of Women from Histories of Contemporary Philosophy”. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 30, no. 2 (2022): 199–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croce, Benedetto. Aesthetic. Translated by Douglas Ainslie. New York, NY: Noonday, 1909.
   Google Scholar
• Danto, Arthur C. The Transfiguration of the Commonplace: A Philosophy of Art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, Stephen. Definition of Art. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, Stephen. “Essential Distinctions for Art Theorists”. In Art and Essence, edited by Stephen Davies and Ananta C. Sukla, 3–16. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, Stephen. “Introduction”. In Art and Essence, edited by Stephen Davies and Ananta C. Sukla, ix–xix. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, Stephen. The Philosophy of Art. Oxford: Blackwell, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, Stephen. “Definitions of Art”. In Routledge Companion to Aesthetics, edited by Berys Gaut and Dominic McIver Lopes, 3rd ed., 213–23. London: Routledge, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Dickie, George. “Defining Art”. American Philosophical Quarterly 6, no. 3 (1969): 253–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickie, George. Art and the Aesthetic: An Institutional Analysis. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1974.
   Google Scholar
• Dickie, George. Introduction to Aesthetics: An Analytic Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Dickie, George. Art and Value. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Diffey, Terry J. “Essentialism and the Definition of ‘Art’”. The British Journal of Aesthetics 13, no. 2 (1973): 103–20.
   Google Scholar
• Diffey, Terry J. “The Idea of Art”. The British Journal of Aesthetics 17, no. 2 (1977): 122–8.
   Google Scholar
• Diffey, Terry J. “On Defining Art”. The British Journal of Aesthetics 19, no. 1 (1979): 15–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diffey, Terry J. “Wittgenstein, Anti-Essentialism and the Definition of Art”. In Wittgenstein, Aesthetics and Philosophy, edited by Peter B. Lewis, 37–51. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Elton, William, ed. Aesthetics and Language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1954.
   Google Scholar
• Elton, William. “Introduction”. In Aesthetics and Language, edited by William Elton, 1–12. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1954.
   Google Scholar
• Feagin, Susan L., and Aaron Meskin. “Introduction”. In Aesthetics: A Comprehensive Anthology, edited by Steven M. Cahn and Aaron Meskin, 391–5. Oxford: Blackwell, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Gallie, William B. “The Function of Philosophical Aesthetics”. Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 57, no. 227 (1948): 302–21.
   Google Scholar
• Gallie, William B. “Art as an Essentially Contested Concept”. The Philosophical Quarterly 6, no. 23 (1956): 97–114.
   Google Scholar
• Gaut, Berys. “‘Art’ as a Cluster Concept”. In Theories of Art Today, edited by Noël Carroll, 25–44. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Gaut, Berys. “The Cluster Account of Art Defended”. The British Journal of Aesthetics 45, no. 3 (2005): 273–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, Gordon. Philosophy of the Arts: An Introduction to Aesthetics. 3rd ed. London: Routledge, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Guyer, Paul. A History of Modern Aesthetics: Volume 3, The Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Haezrahi, Pepita. The Contemplative Activity: Eight Lectures on Aesthetics. London: Allen and Unwin, 1955.
   Google Scholar
• Hampshire, Stuart. “Logic and Appreciation.” World Review (1952). Reprinted in Elton, ed. Aesthetics and Language.
   Google Scholar
• Hanfling, Oswald. “The Problem of Definition”. In Philosophical Aesthetics: An Introduction, edited by Oswald Hanfling, 1–40. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, H. L. A. “The Ascription of Responsibility and Rights”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 49, no. 1 (1948): 171–94.
   Google Scholar
• Hutton, Sarah. “Women, Philosophy and the History of Philosophy”. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 27, no. 4 (2019): 684–701.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamber, Richard. “Weitz Reconsidered: A Clearer View of Why Theories of Art Fail”. The British Journal of Aesthetics 38, no. 1 (1998): 33–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, Daniel A. “Family Resemblance, Relationalism, and the Meaning of ‘Art’”. The British Journal of Aesthetics 47, no. 3 (2007): 280–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemp, J. “Generalization in the Philosophy of Art”. Philosophy 33, no. 125 (1958): 147–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennick, William E. “Does Traditional Aesthetics Rest on a Mistake?”. Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 67, no. 267 (1958): 317–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khatchadourian, Haig. “Art-Names and Aesthetic Judgments”. Philosophy 36, no. 136 (1961): 30–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kivy, Peter. Philosophies of Arts: An Essay in Differences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Kremer, Michael. “Margaret MacDonald and Gilbert Ryle: A Philosophical Friendship”. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 30, no. 2 (2022): 288–311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lake, Beryl. “A Study of the Irrefutability of Two Aesthetic Theories”. In Aesthetics and Language, edited by William Elton, 100–13. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1954.
   Google Scholar
• Langer, Susanne. Feeling and Form: A Theory of Art Developed from New Key. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1953.
   Google Scholar
• Leddy, Thomas. “The Socratic Quest in Art and Philosophy”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 51, no. 3 (1993): 399–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinson, Jerrold. “Philosophical Aesthetics: An Overview”. In Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics, edited by Jerrold Levinson, 3–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Lopes, Dominic McIver. “Nobody Needs a Theory of Art”. Journal of Philosophy 105, no. 3 (2008): 109–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopes, Dominic McIver. Beyond Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “The Philosopher’s Use of Analogy”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 38, no. 1 (1937): 291–312.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “Natural Rights”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 47, no. 1 (1946): 225–50.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “What Are the Distinctive Features of Arguments Used in Criticism of the Arts?”. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 23, no. 1 (1949): 183–94.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “Review of The Philosophy of the Arts, by Morris Weitz”. Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 60, no. 240 (1951): 561–4.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “Art and Imagination”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 53, no. 1 (1953): 205–26.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “Review of The Third Earl of Shaftesbury, by R. L. Brett”. Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 62, no. 247 (1953): 418–9.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “Symposium: The Language of Fiction”. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 28, no. 1 (1954): 165–96.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “Critical Notice of Feeling and Form, by Susan Langer”. Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 64, no. 256 (1955): 549–53.
   Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Margaret. “Review of The Contemplative Activity, by Pepita Haezrahi”. The Philosophical Quarterly 6, no. 23 (1956): 186–7.
   Google Scholar
• Mag Uidhir, Christy. Art and Art-Attempts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Mandelbaum, Maurice. “Family Resemblances and Generalization Concerning the Arts”. American Philosophical Quarterly 2, no. 3 (1965): 219–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margolis, Joseph. “Mr Weitz and the Definition of Art”. Philosophical Studies 9, no. 5 (1958): 88–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margolis, Joseph. “Recent Work in Aesthetics”. American Philosophical Quarterly 2, no. 3 (1965): 182–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFee, Graham. “Art, Essences, and Wittgenstein”. In Art and Essence, edited by Stephen Davies and Ananta C. Sukla, 17–38. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Meskin, Aaron. “Weitz, Morris (1916–1981)”. In Dictionary of American Philosophers, edited by John R. Shook, 2550–4. Bristol: Thoemmes Continuum, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Meskin, Aaron. “From Defining Art to Defining the Individual Arts”. In New Waves in Aesthetics, edited by Kathleen Stock and Kathleen Marie Higgins, 125–49. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, Douglas N. “Art Pure and Simple”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 20, no. 2 (1961): 187–95.
   Google Scholar
• Mothersill, Mary. “Critical Comments”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 20, no. 2 (1961): 195–8.
   Google Scholar
• Mothersill, Mary. Beauty Restored. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Neill, Alex, and Aaron Ridley. “Relation Theories of Art: The History of an Error”. The British Journal of Aesthetics 52, no. 2 (2012): 141–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novitz, David. “Disputes About Art”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 54, no. 2 (1996): 153–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill, Eileen. “Disappearing Ink: Early Modern Women Philosophers and Their Fate in History”. In Philosophy in a Feminist Voice, edited by Janet A. Kourany, 17–62. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, Harold. “Definition and Evaluation in Aesthetics”. The Philosophical Quarterly 23, no. 90 (1973): 15–27.
   Google Scholar
• Passmore, J. A. “The Dreariness of Aesthetics”. Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 60, no. 239 (1951): 318–35.
   Google Scholar
• Ryle, Gilbert. The Concept of Mind. London: Hutcheson, 1949.
   Google Scholar
• Stecker, Robert. Artworks: Definition, Meaning, Value. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Stecker, Robert. “Is It Reasonable to Attempt to Define Art?”. In Theories of Art Today, edited by Noël Carroll, 45–64. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Stecker, Robert. “Definition of Art”. In Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics, edited by Jerrold Levinson, 136–54. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Stock, Kathleen. “Definition of ‘Art’”. In A Companion to Aesthetics, edited by Stephen Davies, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Robert Hopkins, Robert Stecker, and David E. Cooper, 2nd ed., 231–4. Oxford: Blackwell, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Tatarkiewicz, Wladyslaw. “What Is Art? The Problem of Definition Today”. The British Journal of Aesthetics 11, no. 2 (1971): 134–53.
   Google Scholar
• Tilghman, Benjamin R. “Wittgenstein, Games, and Art”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 31, no. 4 (1973): 517–24.
   Google Scholar
• Tilghman, Benjamin R. But Is It Art? The Value of Art and the Temptation of Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Vlasits, Justin. “Margaret MacDonald’s Scientific Common-Sense Philosophy”. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 30 (2022): 267–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waismann, Friedrich. “Verifiability”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 19, no. 1 (1945): 119–50.
   Google Scholar
• Waismann, Friedrich. “Analytic-Synthetic II”. Analysis 11, no. 2 (1950): 25–38.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “Analysis and the Unity of Russell’s Philosophy”. In The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell, edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp, 55–122. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1944.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “Philosophy and the Abuse of Language”. The Journal of Philosophy 44, no. 20 (1947): 533–46.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “Analysis and Real Definition”. Philosophical Studies 1, no. 1 (1950): 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. The Philosophy of the Arts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1950.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “Professor Ryle’s ‘Logical Behaviorism’”. The Journal of Philosophy 48, no. 9 (1951): 297–301.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “Oxford Philosophy”. The Philosophical Review 62, no. 2 (1953): 187–233.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “Symbolism and Art”. Review of Metaphysics 7, no. 3 (1954): 466–81.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “The Role of Theory in Aesthetics”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 15, no. 1 (1956): 27–35.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. Hamlet and the Philosophy of Literary Criticism. London: Faber & Faber, 1964.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “Open Concepts”. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 26, no. 99 (1972): 86–110.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. “Wittgenstein’s Aesthetics”. In Language and Aesthetics, edited by Benjamin R. Tilghman, 7–19. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1973.
   Google Scholar
• Weitz, Morris. The Opening Mind: A Philosophical Study of Humanistic Concepts. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe, Rush Rhees, and G. H. von Wright. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell, 1953.
   Google Scholar
• Wollheim, Richard. Art and Its Objects. New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1968.
   Google Scholar
• Ziff, Paul. “Art and the ‘Object of Art’”. Mind; A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 60, no. 240 (1951): 466–80.
   Google Scholar
• Ziff, Paul. “The Task of Defining a Work of Art”. The Philosophical Review 62, no. 1 (1953): 58–78.
   Google Scholar