Which is more likely: >Everything is Art >Nothing is Art

>>3357507
objectively nothing is art, but everything can be art if you want it to be, you decide

"Art" is just a arbitrary subjective category, so "everything is art" is more likely.

theyre the same statement, essentially

>>3357768

I hate this Incredibles fallicy

Stating that everything is either A or anti-A does not mean the same.

>>3357822
Except that's not what he said/meant. If everything is art, then nothing is art. If everyone is special, then no one is special. Do you see where it's getting at?

>>3357857

Art can exist in a vacuum, the existence of other art doesn't remove the attribute of "Art" from the original work.

File: I hope my eyes deceive me.jpg (44KB, 540x300px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 540x300px

>>3357857
>If everything is white, then nothing is white

File: 1496388173053.jpg (12KB, 331x313px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 331x313px

>humanities

>>3357752
Why do people have such a hard time understanding this

I hereby declare this post to not be art, thereby preserving the validity of all art as art. No need to thank me, artists.

>>3358285

>Objectively

Because it's a retarded post