response to kait

I am responding to Kait’s question, “we know that people claim objects as art because of their expert opinion, but if something makes you feel like it’s art, is that a credible enough reason to say it is?”
I believe this question was discussed at the beginning of the semester when we were trying to categorize random sketches and doodles in relation to art. Most doodles, we determined, were not art because they lacked the intention of the artist. However, there are some intentionless sketches which have been produced and are considered art by some observers. One example would be the doodles of John Lennon. As far as we know, John Lennon never intended any of his sketches to be art. However, the artworld considers them to be art and they have been sold for exorbitant amounts of money. In these cases, art gains its status through to intention of the observer.
There are boundaries though. My laptop, although it requires much skill and knowledge to create, is not art by any standard. Even if it makes me feel like it is a piece of art because of the expert-placement of all its parts, it still is not a work of art.
QUESTION: I just stated that my laptop is not a work of art. However, if presented as a work of art or as an object symbolic of our generation, I am sure many would consider it to be. Is presentation necessary for art to be considered art?