fabosch, all right.
But the question is, which I announced: What are the criteria (aesthetic), we come to abstract art?
Would it be the same criteria that we normally are guided toward figurative art?

Why only abstraknomu art?
The work of art, no matter how much has been invested there high emotions, intellect, can not be so without passing the test of aesthetics.

In other words, all attempts to split the nucleus of an atom with a hammer are doomed to failure, but immediately upon impact could such a powerful wave of sound vibrations, which adversely affects the psyche of the inflicting the blow, and causes him to retreat in panic. (In style by art-lover :))

Samvel, what if you think that the main criteria for the value of works of art?

I think that the criteria that makes the viewer to a picture, basically, should not be changed during the transition from figurative to abstract images. Reservation "basically refers to the moment the present situation, in figurative images except formal pictorial criteria we consider and analyze and properly substantive side of the image (the plot, the relationship of subjects, including cultural and contextual allusions, etc., which is rejected some purists, but it certainly is an integral part of any figurative images). And the rest is the same - composition, the overall color palette, pictorial and plastic solutions, textural moments, fine quality, etc. and all these purely formal, it would seem, aspects, too, often bear some burden, referring to the different cultural contexts. This may be the context of not only paintings, but also music, poetry, etc. And this load, I believe, makes the picture more to it than just an image, makes speak our mind, feelings, if you want, and soul. Then we say that this is art, not a "picture of the furniture store," as expressed in iside.
Incidentally, the same Ingarden, writes on the example of Picasso, that combine abstraction with figurative "inserts" creates a special aesthetic quality that combines the advantages of abstraction and figuration, that is, the image fills the additional context.

Added after 6 minutes
Well you, Peter, and turned, I speculated that could mean your message. Several interpretations, but some of them are true, do not even know :)

All true. But with what tools we evaluate all these components of art works and make judgments about what is good and what is not? Simply put: where is our value-"standard"? Where is this logorifmicheskaya line? I do this to the fact that abstract art is beyond our aesthetic tools.

I am very difficult to clearly answer this question. The only important thing that is a work of art and quite unimportant, consciously or instinctively. Product, it is his creator, his voice, his H. If from the pen of a true artist, came out, the results through its own nature, have received the stamp of his personality, who can say that this is not a work of art?

Samvel, but agree that your post is not clear aesthetic criteria. Then, to paraphrase Dostoyevsky, in the evaluation of art "everything is permitted"?

Let this be an example of "what is an abstraction" :)

Here I you something I do not understand. The only measure of any unbiased viewer is its audience experience and cultural loading, that is, knowledge of the appropriate contexts, the ability to use their rules, the ability to apply them in relation to a particular image. No universal slide rule does not exist. It is at everyone. Of course in each community can select a group of people with similar slide rules, but there will be a lot of different groups. In every historical period in a particular society, perhaps we could identify their "reference group" with a close slide rules, we can distinguish, for example, a group of "advanced" part of society, their slide rules determines the taste of, say, the professional community, in one way or another influence on the trends in art, the formation of the vectors in the development of aesthetic prepochteny majority, etc. etc. But we are already going away somewhere in the direction of sociological mechanisms Art
And why do you think, "abstract art is beyond our aesthetic tools"? I do not understand, explain, if possible.

Here the key point, of course we are talking about such a thing as a secret. The concept-word that is often referred to as the Old and New Testament. The word "mystery" or "mystery" as a term in the Scriptures of the Old Testament denotes the fish or providential act of God. This "secret" was called by God to His prophets: "the Lord GOD does nothing without revealing His secret unto His servants the prophets" (Am 3. 7). "Daniel answered the king [Nebuchadnezzar], and said: The secret which the king hath demanded can not open the king, nor wise, nor charmer, nor magicians, nor soothsayers. But there is a God in heaven, unlocking the secrets" ( Dan 2. 27-28). In my view, a true artist - an enlightened person, the person who opens a secret.

Art de facto - an ideological construct, ie entirely in keeping with the prevailing paradigm. And only occasionally
To achieve this it is very difficult. Society, State of, etc. pressed his weight.
And there is another art form (an ideological-conditioned, individually subjective) - the objective. Formless material world, rising higher forms of life etc. The program's creators of abstract art was just theosophical. Silver Age.

Subscribe to the issue.

Try. To do this, use the analogy with music, art, the most "abstract" available to our perception. Than we do measure our "dignity of a musical work? Those criteria that are developed tradition: the musical form, the wealth of topics and depth of its development, sound and coloring, etc. That is all that dwells in the space of a certain modal-sound context. But the famous concert of Cage, which has not played a single note, it turns out that context. Does this mean that the product Keyzhda is not music, but shioe - art? It seems to me. that the creation of Cage - an extreme degree of abstraction in art, going beyond the limits of our assessment tools. And to appreciate it, you need to "measure" entirely different yardstick.
By the way, did not meet you fully educated and experienced in painting people, "the cognitive field, which was limited to figurative painting, and if it comes to abstraction, they immediately lose the fulcrum?

Cage - a conceptualist, the abstraction is not relevant.
Abstraction - a higher form of existence, and Conceptualism - work on the paradigma-ideological field.