How can one argue that art is for art's sake when it clearly isn't?

How can one argue that art is for art's sake when it clearly isn't?

How can one argue that this thread is Veeky Forums - Literature when it clearly isn't?

How can one argue that this a thread when it clearly isn't?

>when it clearly isn't

Elaborate.

Define art

It has a purpose dipshit. The emotions that art elicit inside people in appreciation of its beauty gives it value.

Still mad about the debate huh?

I hate off-topic threads as much as the next autist, but philosophy is Veeky Forums and aesthetics is a subfield of philosophy.

Your autism is flaring up user

>All art is pretty useless xD
t. brainlet plebeian

So art can't possibly be for art's sake, simply because art makes you feel like a 12 year old girl on her period?