Art:(ψ) an object or event or experience created by an entity that has knowledge of its creation in relation to the creation of such a thing with a metaphysical value.

Experience: (Φ) something that has occurred to an entity.

Aesthetic experience: (β) an experience through sensory system and the processing of such experience.

Judgment: (θ) an activity of taste placed upon the aesthetic experience.

Agreement: (γ) a state within judgment opposite of disagreement.

Disagreement: (μ) a state within judgment opposite of agreement.

Observing art in relation to agreement:
(θψ ⇒ Φ∧β ≡ θ(μ)) ⇒ ⊤

Observing art in relation to disagreement:
(θψ ⇒ Φ∧β ≡ θ(γ)) ⇒ ⊤

Observing a experience:
Φ ⊢ (Φ ⇔ β) ⊕ (θ(γ ⊕ μ))

The above formulae are simplistic constructions on the subject matter. For a more complex adaptation the formulae for the observations will change. Firstly we need to construct a definition of art that is more universal and is able to define anything as art.

If ψ is art and can hold any property
Δ: any property imaginable.

∀ψ ∈ Δ(ψ)

The observation states that art (ψ) holding Δ a property is true for any possible property Δ.

If a property (Δ) of something (x) will exert an experience (Φ).

∀Φ ∈ Δ(x) ≡ ∃Φ ∈¬ Δ(x)

In any case these cannot be totally true, depending on one’s view or understanding of things. If one assume the above propositions as true then one can follow it up with.

∀ψ ∈ Δ(ψ) ∨ (Φ ⊢ (Φ ⇔ β) ⊕ (θ(γ ⊕ μ)) ⇔  ∀Φ ∈ Δ(x) ≡ ∃Φ ∈¬ Δ(x))

Within this case, art having any property will be true if and only if the person observing art (ψ), for the experience to hold to be true, it requires the observer to have satisfied all of the laid out propositions. The existence of the experience validates the existence of the artwork since the property of a thing will produce some form of experience. The relation between the experience and the property of the object or surrounding experience one is having, is the same as the property of any object considered to be art. If one of these observations is false then the other will be false as well, though a false and true property of the observed experience cannot confirm the existence of such an experience.

Object (α) and its property
∀ α(x) ≡ ∃ ¬ α (x)

The two distinctive arguments would be:

∀ψ ∈ Δ(ψ) ∨ (Φ ⊢ (Φ ⇔ β) ⊕ (θ(γ ⊕ μ)) ⇔  ∀Φ ∈ Δ(x) ≡ ∃Φ ∈¬ Δ(x))

∀ α(x) ≡ ∃ ¬ α (x) ∨ (Φ ⊢ (Φ ⇔ β) ⊕ (θ(γ ⊕ μ)) ⇔  ∀Φ ∈ Δ(x) ≡ ∃Φ ∈¬ Δ(x))

In this case (Φ ⊢ (Φ ⇔ β) ⊕ (θ(γ ⊕ μ)) ⇔  ∀Φ ∈ Δ(x) ≡ ∃Φ ∈¬ Δ(x)) is an observation on the experience and judgment made based on such an experience in relation to a property observed.

The difference lays within the semiotic understanding of things in relation to experience and observation. An aesthetic experience and aesthetic as a whole focus on the attainment and understanding of our sensory process. In the case above, the observation provides that an experience no matter what such experience or observation is, will divulge through a specific construction.

Oskar Johnström

Medlemmar i Studio 44