Hume`s Standard Of Taste

Has Hume Succeeded in Establishing a Standard of Taste? Reading Philosophy, Summative Essay Mark received: 70 (First)

Although Hume`s "Of the Standard of Taste" was written in relative haste to bulk out his Philosophical Works, it has remained a prominent topic of discussion within Aesthetics (although the term was not coined until later.) Here I shall examine Hume`s contemplation of the problem of taste, and outline his posed solution. I shall demonstrate why, although he argues convincingly, his solution does not relate to the general people. His solution is fairly dictatorial, at the least impractical, and would not survive in the ever-changing myriad of cultures that is humanity. On these grounds, the standard of taste ultimately fails, falling at the hand of the subjectivity of beauty.

The Problem of Variation of Taste

When addressing aesthetics, which considers man`s capacity to appreciate beauty and his artistic taste, we are confronted by the observation that all men seemingly have different tastes, and different ideas of beauty. Hume noticed that, "The great variety of Taste. is too obvious not to have fallen under every one`s observation" . He notes how, even though this variation in taste is apparent to some extent to everyone, it is in truth more vast than is obvious. Even if two observers were to agree that a piece might be `beautiful` or `elegant`, they each might prescribe a different meaning to these words altogether. Hume deemed this variation in taste a problem for various reasons. Such a difference in taste renders any decisions which must be made about art pieces difficult - however a larger problem was that a sceptic might suggest that a known masterpiece was in fact no more beautiful in itself than any other work. If many varied opinions exist, all as valid as the last, then one could reason that no piece could be said to be categorically more beautiful than another. He also focussed on the existence of masterpieces such as Homer`s Odyssey, which have stood the test of time, being loved the world over for centuries. To him, the existence of such works indicates a degree of objectivity in beauty. Hume asserted that there are in fact invalid views, and that many people possess "absurd and ridiculous" taste. He goes further to say that, "among a thousand different opinions . there is one, and but one, that is just and true". He argues that writers such as Milton and Addison are in fact better than most others, and that it would be absurd to think otherwise. He also, it must be said, did not deny that beauty is a subjective emotional response, and not a physical quality comparable to colour or size. Then, in order for some beauty to be absolutely true, there must exist a standard of taste; that is "a rule, by which the various sentiments of men may be reconciled; . a decision. confirming one sentiment, and condemning another".

Establishing a Standard

Having outlined the problem, and rejected the ideas that a judgement of beauty is merely a reflection of an individual`s personality, and that beauty is a physical property of an object, Hume then seeks to construct a solution. This solution will be his standard of taste. If the above two ideas are false, then the truth must be some kind of compromise between them. Hume proposes a concept similar to that posed by Locke, of primary and secondary qualities. Hume says that, although beauty is no physical property in itself, "there are certain qualities in objects which are fitted by nature to produce those particular feelings." That is, although beauty is a subjective response, there are in fact objective properties which produce these responses, and some pieces can be richer in these properties than others. This concept lends us some of the objectivity from the "beauty is a physical property" hypothesis, however leads us to another problem - we cannot simply inspect an object to see if it is beautiful as we can with physical properties; an assessment of an emotional response must still be made. This leads us to Hume`s `good judges`. He essentially states that for identifying the standard of taste, the average person is unqualified, and that we much look to those better suited. He then spends a large portion of the essay exploring the qualities necessary in a `good judge`. He concludes that, "strong sense, united to delicate sentiment, improved by practice, perfected by comparison, and cleared of all prejudice, can alone entitle critics to this valuable character". The objective standard of taste he has been searching for, then, is the "joint verdict" of a number of "true critics".

Has Hume Succeeded?

Hume`s attempt at defining a standard of taste is an interesting one - he admits subjectivity in appreciation of beauty, however still asserts that a piece`s degree of beauty is an objective truth. His inclusion of `good judges` is seemingly a good attempt to implement his theory of secondary qualities, and fits in with his belief that the taste of some is simply incorrect. It would certainly provide us with some form of definitive (correct or not) judgement on a piece, and allow us to state that something is, in fact, beautiful. There are, however, a great number of problems with the theory, some of which I shall address. Many of the problems are practical in nature. For example, given that the criteria for a good judge are so demanding, it is entirely possible that, in many cases, they might not exist, or be unidentifiable. That is indeed if Hume meant for his critics to be real, and not an ideal, a point which is not abundantly clear. This would render his standard of taste inaccessible, and we would be none the wiser as to what pieces in the world are truly beautiful. There also lies a problem with the "joint verdict" which the standard relies on. Hume has re-introduced subjectivity with the judges; if the true judges` opinions were to conflict, or were to vastly conflict with that of the general public, then we are stuck.

This leads us to the main problem I will address, as pointed out by Levinson in 2002 - the standard of taste, given to us by the good judges, seemingly does not necessarily have any connection to the real world and its people. If a person enjoys a piece which is not, by the standard, considered beautiful, what difference would it make to them? They would continue to enjoy its perceived beauty, regardless of whether it passed the critics` test or not. Furthermore, if it were to come about that the opinion of the general population disagreed with that of the critics, their `standard` evaluation would fall to meaninglessness. Why should a person strive for the ideal of a `good judge`? Levinson, in fact, poses a solution to his own objection - one which draws from Hume`s own ideas. He poses that we should respect the verdict of the good judges, not simply because they tick the right boxes to qualify as such, but because they are the ones best qualified to compare any piece to known and generally undisputed pieces which have stood the test of time, referred to as masterworks. He says, "artistically good artworks will be ones that are in some measure comparable in their rewards to those masterpieces recognised universally as aesthetically outstanding". In this way, he argues, the good judge can assess the beauty of a piece in a way which will be relevant to all. This solution, again, leaves much to be desired. It remains perfectly plausible that an individual might not identify with accepted masterworks, and that their idea of beauty remains their own, regardless of whether a third party is attempting to impress a standard of taste upon them, urging them to believe that their taste is simply incorrect. It still stands, for all Hume`s efforts, that a standard of taste is just not possible, for the simple reason that taste is not standard. Taste is vastly different across and within cultures, and is ever-changing. In fact, variation in taste is essential to the evolution of our creativity, and without it, if we all found beauty in the same things, said beauty would only diminish.

In conclusion, I have described Hume`s attempt to establish a standard of taste, and underlined the main problems with the theory. I have shown that his endeavour is fundamentally flawed, as the subjectivity of beauty is so absolute that no standard can be found. Indeed, it is my view that we are in no need of a standard of taste, as lack thereof allows our taste to evolve. In short, Hume`s standard of taste has fallen to the subjectivity of beauty.

1490 words exc title & bibliography

Bibliography

Hume - David Hume, The Philosophical Works of David Hume, vol. 3 (Essays Moral, Political, and Literary), 1828, London

Locke - John Locke - An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, II.viii

Levinson - Jerold Levinson - Artistic worth and Personal Taste, 2002. The journals of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 68:3 Summer 2010.