I make no apology for being esoteric or frank.
For the purposes of knowing what art is let us define it in two ways:
1. Art is an experience
(a) the experience of the viewer- what the viewer brings to the experience (knowledge or not; taste...) and what they walk away with
(b) the experience of the art object- where it is experienced and it's context, it's lifespan and preservation, it's provenance
(c) the experience of the creator- intent, process, and should take into account all three experiences
2. Philosophically art can be defined as the content and it's means of representation and the appropriateness or inappropriateness of content to representation and vice versa.
With our terms defined, can we stop supporting bad taste. There are wrong experiences to art. If your reaction to Carl Andre or is that a 5-year old could do it, then that is wrong. That reaction is nowhere near the intent of the artist and not worth your time in the experience. Learn something and come back. Kehinde Wiley... now a 5-year could have thought of THAT! Who told this guy he should stop thinking before he started painting? Don't let technical proficiency cover up the lack of thought he puts into his work.