Page 225 - DENG502_PROSE
P. 225
Unit 20: David Hume-Of Essay Writing ...
Comprehensiveness vs. Discrimination Notice that (3) and (4) are not identical claims. The former Notes
suggests the existence of a general and more comprehensive rule, the latter only something that
could be used in discriminatory way so that different artworks and aesthetic judgments could be
ranked. Hume hopes to be able to find at least (4) if it turns out that the sentiments of men are so
different that they cannot be possibly harmonized (3). But throughout the essay he vacillates
between these two kinds of standards (the more ambitious one and the more discriminative one).
Objection One kind of philosophy (skeptical) opposes the idea that there is any standard of taste.
It asserts the equal right of every personal evaluation. In that respect, it agrees with one strain of
common sense which preaches the equal value of all taste. These are the main characteristics of
this position:
The refusal of any standard of taste is based on one fundamental distinction that sharply separates
the nature of sentiments from that of judgments. This distinction corresponds to the distinction
between taste and opinion. The former is a matter of feelings, the latter of facts. Other differences
could be represented as follows:
As Hume states at the beginning of the essay, there is a huge variety of taste (sentiments) and
opinion (judgments). While all sentiments regarding one and the same object are right, only one
opinion out of many possible could be right. We can conclusively resolve factual disputes by
matching opinions with relevant facts, we cannot but “acquiesce” to our subjective feelings in
matters of what we like or dislike. Taste is a kind of sentiment and therefore subjective. There is
a parallel between bodily and mental taste to the effect that both are subjective.
Beauty - Deformity Beauty and deformity are not objective qualities. They exist only in the mind
as the sentiments of blame and approbation exist in our heart. Some people will regard object
beautiful that others perceive as ugly. Therefore it is fruitless to seek the real beauty and deformity
as is fruitless to seek the real sweet or real bitter.
The prominence of taste and beauty in the discussion of art is defining for the 18th century
aesthetics. Hume is here under influence of Francis Hutcheson (1694-1747) who held that beauty
is not a quality of objects but a subjective idea. Another point of agreement with his contemporaries:
mental (aesthetic) taste is very similar in its functioning and status with physiological (bodily)
taste. Hume pursues this analogy throughout the essay. What makes something sweet or bitter is
the disposition of the organs that are aroused by the perception of certain object. The same holds
true of beauty and deformity. The disposition of our organs (that is, its previous or current condition)
decides what we’ll like or dislike. If we put our left hand in a bucket with cold water while
holding the right hand in the bucket with hot water and then both immerse in a vessel. Aesthetic
sentiments like beauty and perfection are in fact more subjective than bodily taste because aesthetic
feelings depend ml with lukewarm water we’ll have two different sensations.
Aesthetic sentiments like beauty and perfection are in fact more subjective than bodily taste because
aesthetic feelings depend more on the consciousness of the perceiving individual and are therefore
more idiosyncratic. Therefore it is in vain to seek objective, “real”, “true” beauty. However, there
is another strain of common sense (and another kind of philosophy, although not named by
Hume). It recognizes the obvious differences in quality between various artists and artworks and
asserts the objectivity and inequality of taste. Some judgments of taste are just plainly wrong
whereas some other are obviously right. This position (represented by Thomas Reid) is characterized
by the following features:
1. Philosophy Objectivist Criticism
2. Common Sense 2nd Type
3. Standard Yes
4. Justification Inequality of Taste
LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 219