Abstract

In attempting to give a clearer sense to the notion of “applied aesthetics”, I explore analogies and disanalogies between the disciplinary sub‐structure of Aesthetics and the disciplinary sub‐structures of Ethics and Philosophy of Science. I argue that, even if we were to accept the traditional ‘top‐down’ understanding of the distinction between pure and applied fields of Ethics, this distinction admits of only a limited extension to Aesthetics. In Philosophy of the Aesthetic, which seems the most promising area in which to pursue such an extension, the particularity of aesthetic judgment presents an obstacle to thinking of fields like “everyday aesthetics” as applications of more general aesthetic principles even if the definition of such fields presupposes a more general conception of the nature of the aesthetic. In Philosophy of Art, on the other hand, it is other philosophical fields, rather than Aesthetics itself, that may be applied to questions raised by our artistic practices. If, however, we operate with the idea that a philosophical field of inquiry is “applied” insofar as it engages with “specific”, “practical”, or “relevant” questions, then arguably philosophy of the arts as a whole is ‘applied’ if one accepts that even the most foundational questions are rationally accountable to our actual artistic practices.