Has a pertinent definition of conceptual art: that that transgresses existings definitions of art. Then moves on to jabs at other artists and psycho-mystical marxist musings.
Critiques Greenberg's formalism (pretty art) and favours the linguistic proposition over materiality (text as art). Works towards the dematerialisation of the art object. Albeit, unlike Lucy Lippard, Kosuth does not glide into the realm of the banal of art, ‘anyone can do it at home’ art.
Progresses the field of theory-as-art, and makes the penetration of the aesthetic field much more lax for even those who despite having the taste of a toad understand formal logic propositions and set theory.
Strongest counter argument can be found in Mel Bochner’s writings that state that there cannot be any immaterial art. Outisde the spoken word, even an idea on a piece of paper requires a piece of paper as material support. Ambivalent argument perhaps is that all art is actually immaterial once it leaps from the retina to the soft cortex.
To be used in conversation on Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, saying "Sure, it is great, but nothing came of it until Kosuth made chairs with it."