In this lucid and insightful essay, renowned linguist Roy Harris reflects on the early nineteenth-century doctrine of 8220;art for art8217;s sake.8221; This was attacked by Proudhon and Nietzsche, but defended by Th233;ophile Gautier and E. M. Forster. It influenced movements as diverse as futurism and Dada. Over the past two centuries, three main positions have emerged. The 8220;institutional8221; view declares art to be a status conferred upon certain works by the approval of influential institutions. The 8220;idiocentric8221; view gives absolute priority to the judgment of the individual. The third is the 8220;conceptual8221; view of art, which insists that what counts is the idea that inspired a work, not the physical execution. But as Harris shows, the tacit assumptions which once supported this Debate and these positions have now collapsed. 8220;Art8221; as a coherent category has imploded, leaving behind a historical residue of empty questions that contemporary society can no longer answer. The Great Debate about Art provides much needed signposts for understanding this sorry state of affairs.