Consider the following possibility, based on an exhibit at the Tate Gallery in 1976. A person already known, perhaps even famous, as a “minimalist” sculptor buys 120 bricks and, on the floor of a well-known art museum, arranges them in a rectangular pile, 2 bricks high, 6 across, and 10 lengthwise. He labels it Pile of Bricks. Across town, a bricklayer’s assistant at a building site takes 120 bricks of the very same kind and arranges them in the very same way, wholly unaware of what has happened in the museum - he is just a tidy bricklayers’ assistant. Can the first pile of bricks be a work of art while the second pile is not, even though the two piles are seemingly identical in all observable respects? Why, or why not?
Consider the following possibility, based on an exhibit at the Tate Gallery in 1976. A person already known, perhaps even famous, as a “minimalist” sculptor buys 120 bricks and, on the floor of a well-known art museum, arranges them in a rectangular pile, 2 bricks high, 6 across, and 10 lengthwise. He labels it Pile of Bricks. Across town, a bricklayer’s assistant at a building site takes 120 bricks of the very same kind and arranges them in the very same way, wholly unaware of what has happened in the museum - he is just a tidy bricklayers’ assistant. Can the first pile of bricks be a work of art while the second pile is not, even though the two piles are seemingly identical in all observable respects? Why, or why not?
Unlock instant AI solutions
Tap the button
to generate a solution