This study examines the impact of categorising visual representations of so-called “immoral acts” as either art or non-art on their subsequent evaluation and emotional response. Since the Renaissance, artists have employed their craft as a vehicle for challenging societal norms, utilising the medium of art to prompt the formation of new perspectives and to challenge the boundaries of traditional categorisation. In contrast to the processing of everyday objects, artworks are subject to a different set of cognitive processes, allowing for a more nuanced perception and the construction of deeper meanings. Overall, our study involved 140 participants who viewed the same set of 20 images under one of three experimental conditions[CCC1] [IG2] : an online setting that did not label any work as art, an online art gallery setting, and a physical art gallery setting. The results demonstrated that, while all conditions elicited negative emotional responses, the images were evaluated more favourably when labelled as art in an online art gallery setting, and even more so when viewed in a physical art gallery. Furthermore, images presented as art were less comprehensible and more surprising, indicating that viewers applied fewer conventional heuristics and categories in processing them. These findings suggest that art, particularly in traditional art settings, creates distinctive conditions that challenge and extend habitual thought patterns. By encouraging viewers to engage with extreme and novel ideas, art plays a pivotal role in transforming individuals, communities, and societies.