ABSTRACT

This chapter assesses what the normal version of artistically relevant controversy asserts when it asserts the dogma of estheticism and to say why that dogma will not serve for an answer to the claims question. The dogma of estheticism holds all artistically relevant judgments of the sort which any critic of the arts qua critic of the arts would care to make are directly or indirectly esthetic judgments or they are not artistically relevant judgments of that sort at all, but shams. Normal version "esthetic judgments" constitute highly special judgments offered in the process of applying the rule of taste in an appropriate manner. In a context of production the parties to the construction argument function according to the regulative principles remarked so far: the rules of use, impersonality, objectivity; the rule of law; and the rule of respect.