I argue that all that is relevant to appreciating art as art is the “abstract entity that is the work of art.” The object of aesthetic contemplation, the bearer of aesthetic value, just is this abstract entity picked out by the sortal concept ‘work of art,’ which requires some vehicle but does not require the particular vehicle that is the original painting. Since this is so, the work of art is present in a visually-indistinguishable duplicate to the same extent and to the same degree as it is in the original. To hedge my bets a little against those who are not persuaded by this strong claim, I also argue that, assuming there is a genuine value-relevant difference between an original and a duplicate, the duplicate could in principle share in or exceed the value of the original.
In Defense of Fakes and Artistic Treason: Why Visually-Indistinguishable Duplicates of Paintings Are Just as Good as the Originals
In Defense of Fakes and Artistic Treason: Why Visually-Indistinguishable Duplicates of Paintings Are Just as Good as the Originals
Recent Publications
- Debating Libertarianism: What Makes Society Just?
- Questioning the Assumptions of Political Discourse A Philosophical Analysis of Fundamental Concepts (2025)
- Common Law Liberalism: A New Theory of the Libertarian Society (Oxford University Press, 2024)
- “Diversity and Group Performance,” Encyclopedia of Diversity, Springer, 2024
- “Evading and Aiding: The Moral Case Against Paying Taxes,” with Christopher Freiman and Jessica Flanigan, Extreme Philosophy, ed. Stephen Hetherington, Routledge (2024)
Recent News
- How Plasma Donations are Helping to Pay Some Americans’ Bills – and Treat Patients Around the World
- America: The human plasma factory
- Office Hours: Evaluating the True Impact of Seemingly Good Acts
- Business as a Force for Good: MBA Students Support Hurricane Helene Victims Through Ethics Project
- New Editorial Team at Philosophy and Public Affairs
