Show by means of detailed reference to the text of Of the Standard of Taste whether or not you think Hume succeeds in establishing that there is such a standard.
...d conduct and manners, the difference among men is really greater than at first it appears. [Texts, p.195] In paragraph eleven, Hume notes that the greatest works of art are appreciated in all times and all places (interestingly, he alludes to works from classical times): All the changes of climate, government, religion, and language have not been able to obscure his (Homer’s) glory. [Texts, p.198] In paragraphs twelve to sixteen Hume attempts to explain this universal recognition of greatness in terms of the “proper” functioning of taste in various individuals, in response to properties of the object being appreciated. He posits the question how do we know when our taste is functioning properly? In addition, he attempts to explain how we can agree on what counts as “good” art, even though our assessments are founded in our “taste” or “sentiment”. Hume describes in detail a prevailing philosophical view of his time, namely, that “sentiment” is what we might call subjective and no resolution of differences is possible, but that “judgments” are what we might call objective and that disagreements can be resolved according to properties that are “really” in the object. Surely, however, a “sentiment” is an emotion. Hume is describing his own position; he denies that distinctions between what is good and bad can be based on reasoning about things. He goes on to say in paragraph seven: All sentiment is right: because sentiment has a reference to nothing beyond itself [Texts, p.197] This seems to be something of a cliché, “to each his own” insofar as he is summarizing the core idea of his theory of moral and aesthetic value, that they are based on sentiment (emotion) and not judgment. Taste is based on a feeling, and a feeling of pleasure is a personal response to something. You either have the feeling or you do not, but if you do no-one can accuse you of having a mistaken feeling. The point of this paragraph is to set up the problem that there seems no objective beauty if taste is a matter of sentiment. Hume goes on to write in paragraph seven: Beauty is no quality in things themselves: it exists merely in the mind which contemplates them: and each person perceives a different beauty... It is very natural, and even quite necessary, to extend this axiom to mental, as well as bodily taste; and thus common sense, which is so often at variance with philosophy… [Texts, p.197] “Bodily taste” is literally the taste of something that we put in our mouth, such as the flavour of the cheese I buy from the delicatessen counter in Sainsbury’s. However, the flavour is the cause of a further response, our pleasure or displeasure (is the cheese too strong or too mild). Mental taste is a parallel case, usually restricted to visual and auditory sensations; it usually involves exercise of the audience’s imagination. In paragraph six, Hume contends that: It is natural for us to seek a Standard of Taste; a rule by which various sentiments of men may be reconciled; at least a decision afforded confirming one sentiment, and condemning another. [Texts, p196] At this point Hume explicitly identifies the standard with a rule. Until now he has suggested that specific works and artists (for example Homer) are the standard of taste, however, later, he will (inconsistently) say that specific works of art serve as the standard. Hume’s “rules of composition” are explored in depth in paragraph nine: It is evident that none of the rules of composition are fixed by reasonings a priori, or can be esteemed abstract conclusions of the understanding, from comparing those habitudes and relations of ideas, which are eternal and immutable. [Texts, p.197] Consistent with Hume’s empiricism, this paragraph claims that these rules are arrived at by a process of empirical generalization. Hume believes that all general rules of art are based on experience, not on a priori reasoning. Reasonings a priori must be combined with factual claims in order to generate factual conclusions. We could argue that there is considerable variance about what Hume has in mind when he refers to these rules (or “laws”) are they, for example, consistent with our own individual experiences of art? They are sometimes described as rules of criticism and sometimes as rules followed by artists. It seems quite clear that Hume thinks that these rules describe “a certain conformity or relation between the object and the organ...