Why do some philosophers begin aesthetics with aesthetic experience rather than works of art?

Some philosophers prioritize aesthetic experience over works of art because they believe that understanding the value of the aesthetic realm—our motivation for engaging with, studying, and creating it—is essential to justifying the existence of aesthetics as a branch of philosophy.1

Several key reasons support this approach:

• The Mutability of Art: Art and its supporting institutions are historically determined and mutable features of the human condition. Relying solely on the concept of "art" risks building a theory on a fragile, potentially inessential foundation.1
• Lack of Commonality: When considered materially, various art forms (such as music, painting, or architecture) share few commonalities beyond being artifacts. Attempts to define a "family resemblance" or a unifying property like "significant form" often result in tautologies or vague generalizations.1
• Dependency on Conception: Aesthetic judgment is not merely a reaction to a material object but depends on our conception of that object. For example, features considered beautiful in a horse may be viewed as ugly in a human, and architectural beauty is governed by ideas of function. Because our perception is tied to these specific conceptions, studying the overarching, abstract category of "art" may obscure rather than illuminate the nature of aesthetic interest.1
• Broader Scope: Many human activities involving taste—such as manners, dress, and decoration—are removed from the world of fine art. An aesthetics focused exclusively on art may fail to account for these significant areas of human experience.1

By focusing on the intentional object of experience, philosophers aim to identify the core of the aesthetic impulse, which is deeply embedded in human nature and inseparable from the complex mental life of rational beings.12