Abstract
I argue that intentionalism in aesthetics and in legal interpretation is vulnerable to a different sort of criticism than is found in the voluminous literature on the topic. Specifically, a kind of paradox arises for the intentionalist out of recognition of a second-order intention embedded in the social practices that characterize both art and law. The paper shows how this second-order intention manifests itself in each of the two enterprises, and argues that its presence entails the overriding centrality of the public text, and hence a rejection of the interpretive stance distinctive of intentionalism itself.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 32-48 |
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | British Journal of Aesthetics |
Volume | 45 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2005 |