CLT?

[The Finger of Cratylus]

It is not impossible to divide in a vital experience the
practical, emotional, and intellectual from one another and
to set the properties of one over against the
characteristics of the others. The emotional phase binds 
parts together in a single whole; "intellectual" simply
names the fact that the experience has meaning; "practical"
indicates that the organism is interacting with events and
objects which surround it. The most elaborate philosophic or
scientific inquiry and the most ambitious industrial or
political enterprise has, when its different ingredients
constitute an integral experience, esthetic quality
.
Nevertheless, the experiences in question are dominantly
intellectual or practical, rather than distinctively
esthetic, because of the interest and purpose that initiate
and control them
.In a distinctively esthetic experience,
characteristics that are subdued in other experiences are
dominant; those that are subordinate are
controlling---namely, the characteristics in virtue of which
the experience is an integral complete experience on its own
account. " 

John Dewey, ART AS EXPERIENCE

This is Dewey, not quite able, even with his brilliance, as
Kant's  before him, to quit the shadows cast by  Aristotle
and those dusty old Greeks. 

"...but only moved his finger and criticized the sophists
for saying that it was impossible to step twice into the
same river; for he thought one could not do it even once."
Met.iv.5.1010a6-14,





Otto Sell wrote:
> 
> apropos "last year's theory"...
> 
> I'm currently making my way through John Dewey's *Art As Experience* from
> 1934 and like it. It is a very "beautiful" read. Art Theory that grabbed me
> from the first sentence:
> 
> "By one of the ironic perversities that often attend the course of affairs,
> the existence of the works of art upon which formation of an esthetic theory
> depends has become an obstruction to theory about them."
> 
> The first 33 pages are already heavily underlined.
> 
> Otto