Speaker A
When it comes to judging art, we often recognize that there are a variety of tastes. What somebody likes might not be the same kind of art that I like. People have various opinions on art due to their different tastes, and they disagree.
Exploring David Hume's 'Of the Standard of Taste,' this video discusses the objectivity of judgments and subjectivity of sentiments in art appreciation.
Key Takeaways
- Judgments about art are objective claims referencing real objects, while sentiments are subjective feelings.
- Taste is often seen as subjective, but Hume argues for a standard that allows for meaningful evaluation of art.
- Refining taste requires practice and exposure to develop sensitivity to artistic qualities.
- We cannot argue against sentiments, but we can debate judgments about art based on shared standards.
- Understanding Hume's distinction helps reconcile why people disagree on art yet still recognize some works as better or worse.
Summary
- David Hume distinguishes between judgments, which are objective and refer to real matters of fact, and sentiments, which are subjective and cannot be true or false.
- Artistic taste is commonly viewed as subjective, but Hume argues there is a tension between this and the idea that some art can be judged as better or worse.
- Judgments about art involve reference to objects and can be disputed, unlike sentiments which are personal feelings and cannot be argued against.
- Hume proposes that a 'standard of taste' exists, allowing for some universal principles to adjudicate differing opinions on art.
- Developing a delicacy of taste requires practice, exposure, and refinement to recognize finer qualities and emotions in artworks.
- Taste is not immutable or eternal but relates to objects in the world and can be cultivated over time.
- The video uses examples like Rebecca Black's 'Friday' and the film 'The Room' to illustrate common perceptions of good and bad art.
- Comparison with other artworks is necessary to form judgments about quality and to praise or blame art effectively.
- The distinction between literal taste (e.g., wine tasting) and aesthetic taste is emphasized to clarify misunderstandings about subjectivity in art.
- The video aims to clarify common misconceptions about taste and encourage deeper engagement with art through philosophical insights.
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
on what is beautiful David Hume suggests that there is more to this story than meets the eye I'm philosophy professor and co-host of overthink podcast Ellie Anderson and I'm sharing some ideas today from David Humes of the standard of taste this work
Speaker A
On what is beautiful. David Hume suggests that there is more to this story than meets the eye. I'm a philosophy professor and co-host of the Overthink podcast, Ellie Anderson, and I'm sharing some ideas today from David Hume's "Of the Standard of Taste," this work
Speaker A
standard of taste and he begins the argument by thinking about the difference between judgment on the one hand and sentiment or feeling on the other hand judgment's Hume says have references to what are Beyond themselves to real matters of fact if I say Sacramento is
Speaker A
from 1757. The excerpt that I'm using is from this Aesthetics Anthology, which is what I have used in the past when teaching philosophy of art. Hume says that in order to be able to judge between different tastes, we need a
Speaker A
could say Los Angeles is the capital of California that would still be a judgment it would just be a bad judgment judgments are objective by virtue of the fact that they have applications to real world matters of fact
Speaker A
standard of taste. And he begins the argument by thinking about the difference between judgment on the one hand and sentiment or feeling on the other hand. Judgments, Hume says, have references to what are beyond themselves, to real matters of fact. If I say Sacramento is
Speaker A
are out there in the world the reason that I can be wrong in about a judgment in saying that Los Angeles is the capital of California is because that judgment is about something objective it is about this like object Los Angeles
Speaker A
the capital of California, I am making a judgment. I am making a claim to something that actually exists outside in the world and which I hope corresponds to reality. Not all judgments are right, of course. Some of my judgments can be wrong. I
Speaker A
can tell me that a judgment is wrong sentiments also don't represent anything actual in the object thus they are subjective and this also means for Hume that sentiments are all right we can't have a distinction between a false and a true sentiment the
Speaker A
could say Los Angeles is the capital of California. That would still be a judgment. It would just be a bad judgment. Judgments are objective by virtue of the fact that they have applications to real-world matters of fact.
Speaker A
something to argue for against they aren't making judgments about states of Affairs in the world as a result according to this distinction between judgment and sentiment that Hume has laid out those that say that taste is only about
Speaker A
And so when we say that they're objective, I think sometimes that word gets really misunderstood, misconstrued. We're not saying that they are permanent, immutable, eternal, whatever. What we are saying is that judgments have to do with objects, with things that
Speaker A
specifically is and we can't argue against one another's tastes because those things are subjective they can't be wrong and Hugh thinks that this is a pretty Common Sense View and I think this is absolutely right I hear all the
Speaker A
are out there in the world. The reason that I can be wrong about a judgment in saying that Los Angeles is the capital of California is because that judgment is about something objective. It is about this, like, object Los Angeles,
Speaker A
artistic taste is subjective and Hume says that yes that is a very very common view there's this weird thing that also coexists in common sense which is a view that is very much in tension with the notion that taste is subjective
Speaker A
this object capital of California. Now, this is different from sentiments. Hume says sentiments have reference to nothing beyond themselves. As such, they can actually never be disputed. Nobody can tell me that a sentiment is wrong in the way that they
Speaker A
can look it up now and pause the video if you want to if you haven't heard of it Rebecca Black was a teenager who uh came up with this song that is just like universally recognized as bad or at
Speaker A
can tell me that a judgment is wrong. Sentiments also don't represent anything actual in the object. Thus, they are subjective. And this also means, for Hume, that sentiments are all right. We can't have a distinction between a false and a true sentiment the
Speaker A
of art are actually bad the common Hallmark for this in film is the film The Room which is considered by many to be the worst film of all time so how do reconcile the fact that Common Sense on
Speaker A
way that we can have a distinction between a false and a true judgment. This, I think, can be seen in contemporary parlance when people say things like, "Oh, well, you can't argue against feelings," right? Because feelings just aren't
Speaker A
to posit that a standard of taste can be a way to adjudicate these opinions that are seemingly intention and where humans to go with this is the idea that there are Universal principles of taste that are if not exactly the same among
Speaker A
something to argue for or against. They aren't making judgments about states of affairs in the world. As a result, according to this distinction between judgment and sentiment that Hume has laid out, those that say that taste is only about
Speaker A
to recognize the principles of taste in your perceptions of artworks you have to practice you have to refine your taste I want to draw attention to what he says some of the reasons are behind why we don't recognize that some artworks are
Speaker A
sentiment claim that there can be no standard of taste, right? That I can't argue against somebody else's taste. According to this view, taste is subjective, and so we can have different opinions about who the greatest living artist or greatest living musician
Speaker A
produce sentiments to develop a delicacy of taste involves attuning ourselves to these qualities and gaining a sensibility to the finer emotions there are going to be valences of emotions that we don't recognize before we become attuned through uh developing our taste
Speaker A
specifically is, and we can't argue against one another's tastes because those things are subjective. They can't be wrong. And Hume thinks that this is a pretty common-sense view. And I think this is absolutely right. I hear all the
Speaker A
very many flavors but over time you can learn to identify more and more and have a much greater delicacy I also want to briefly interject here on this point about wine and say that when Hume is talking about taste he's not talking
Speaker A
time from my students that, "Art is subjective," which it's literally not. I mean, art has to do with objects in the world. But what I think people mean when they say art is subjective is that artistic judgments are subjective or
Speaker A
podcast we have an episode on taste about this and then we also have a couple of YouTube videos that pertain to this as well that put pressure on the idea that our literal sense of taste is distinct from the aesthetic sense of
Speaker A
artistic taste is subjective. And Hume says that yes, that is a very, very common view. There's this weird thing that also coexists in common sense, which is a view that is very much in tension with the notion that taste is subjective,
Speaker A
right and so we have to practice to refine our delicacy we have to be exposed to a work of art multiple times we can't just have a snap judgment about it and the more that we are exposed to a
Speaker A
and this is the claim that some art is good and some is bad. The example that I love to use with my students for this, maybe it's a little bit dated at this point, is Rebecca Black's song "Friday." You
Speaker A
thinks that if we don't have different artworks to compare a work to we won't be able to identify whether it is good or not and so we learn how to praise or blame an artwork through comparison so here what you can already see I'm
Speaker A
can look it up now and pause the video if you want to if you haven't heard of it. Rebecca Black was a teenager who came up with this song that is just like universally recognized as bad or at
Speaker A
currently lack so far we have delicacy practice and comparison now the fourth is Prejudice Prejudice really gets in the way of our being able to recognize what a good versus bad work of art is so Hume says that the critic
Speaker A
least was when it first came out. And this is why it became a meme and lots of people teased it. And so it seems like it's kind of in tension with the common-sense view that taste is subjective to recognize that some works
Speaker A
we have to have all of these circumstances the circumstances in which the artwork was created in mind and place ourselves in the same situation as the audience we should also try to remove judging an artwork on the basis of judging its
Speaker A
of art are actually bad. The common hallmark for this in film is the film "The Room," which is considered by many to be the worst film of all time. So how do we reconcile the fact that common sense, on
Speaker A
thinks that we need to bracket that out which also raises some really interesting questions about the separation of the art from the artist um which I think you see raging in debates today is Good Sense Hume thinks that when we
Speaker A
the one hand, says that taste is subjective, rooted in what Hume calls sentiment, while also on the other hand espousing the idea that in fact we can and do make judgments about what good and bad art are all the time? Hume wants
Speaker A
the effect for instance of prejudice in summary he combines these five elements that we've been discussing and says the following strong sense which here is a good sense United to delicate sentiment improved by practice perfected by comparison and cleared of all Prejudice
Speaker A
to posit that a standard of taste can be a way to adjudicate these opinions that are seemingly in tension. And where Hume wants to go with this is the idea that there are universal principles of taste that are, if not exactly the same among
Speaker A
Good Sense delicacy practice comparison and the absence of prejudice It Is by means of developing these that our very organs of internal sensation which Hume says are imperfect and sometimes produce the wrong sentiments will be corrected and allow us to
Speaker A
everyone, at least nearly the same. He points out a few exceptions in the piece, but that few are qualified to judge art because these principles of taste haven't been developed in everyone. In order to develop your own taste and
Speaker A
would also recommend listening to the podcast overthink because we talk a lot about philosophy of art there and share our opinions rather than summarize the views of other folks
Topics:David Humestandard of tasteaestheticsart judgmentsubjectivityobjectivityphilosophy of arttaste refinementOverthink Podcastart criticism
