Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
David Hume, born in Edinburgh (1711-1776), studied law but switched to philosophy with such passion, it hurt his health. He traveled France multiple times, befriending famous thinkers like d'Alembert, Turgot, and Rousseau. Even helping Rousseau find a job and home in England!
Hume's most famous work was in philosophy, pushing the ideas of Locke to the extreme, questioning everything. He also wrote an eight-volume history of England and many essays on politics, money, right and wrong, and even beauty!
"Of the Standard of Taste" by David Hume wasn't published as a standalone work, but appeared as part of a collection called "Four Dissertations" in 1757. So, while Hume likely wrote the essay earlier, it officially reached the public in that year. This piece, "Of the Standard of Taste," shows his clear thinking and smooth writing. He's considered one of the sharpest thinkers of 18th century Britain and a key figure in understanding its intellectual trends.
Explanation of David Hume's "Of the Standard of Taste"
Hume extends this observation to a broader perspective, asserting that those who can transcend cultural and temporal boundaries witness even greater inconsistencies and contradictions in taste. He notes the tendency to label as "barbarous" anything diverging significantly from one's own taste, only to realize that such judgments are reciprocated. This realization prompts humility, as individuals become hesitant to assert their preferences in the face of a multitude of conflicting opinions.
The philosopher contends that while there is an apparent convergence on certain terms of praise and blame within a language, such as elegance or fustian, the underlying meanings are subject to individual interpretation. What may be universally applauded in general terms becomes a source of disagreement when scrutinized in detail. Hume highlights a paradox where people seem to agree on broad aesthetic principles but diverge when evaluating specific instances, leading to disputes rooted in misunderstood nuances.
Moreover, Hume draws a distinction between matters of opinion and scientific matters, stating that in the former, differences often arise in generalities rather than specifics. He suggests that resolving disputes in matters of opinion requires clarifying the terms used, as parties may realize that their disagreements were based on misinterpretations rather than fundamental disparities in judgment.
Hume is exploring the complexity of aesthetic judgment, asserting that while there appears to be a shared understanding of certain aesthetic principles, the devil lies in the details. The variety of taste is not just apparent but more profound upon examination. The section encourages a nuanced approach to discussions of taste, emphasizing the importance of understanding the specific meanings attached to aesthetic terms to foster a more genuine appreciation of diverse perspectives.
The philosopher explores the foundation of morality, emphasizing the role of sentiment over reason. He contends that ethical judgments are influenced more by sentiment than by abstract reasoning, leading to variations in opinions on conduct and manners.
Hume observes a seemingly universal consensus among writers across different cultures and historical periods regarding the praise of virtues such as justice, humanity, magnanimity, prudence, and veracity, as well as the condemnation of their opposites. Even poets, whose works often appeal to the imagination, align in promoting similar moral principles. Hume attributes this harmony in morals to the influence of plain reason, asserting that reason maintains similar sentiments across individuals, preventing the controversies inherent in abstract sciences.
However, Hume introduces an element of skepticism by suggesting that part of the apparent moral harmony might be attributed to the nature of language. He argues that terms like "virtue" universally imply praise, while their opposites imply blame. This linguistic structure, according to Hume, naturally discourages the use of terms in a way that contradicts their positive or negative connotations. As an example, he contrasts the portrayal of heroism in Homer's Achilles, where ferocity is prevalent, with Fenelon's more tempered approach in depicting virtues.
Hume further illustrates the impact of language on moral perceptions by comparing the portrayal of virtues and vices in different cultural and linguistic contexts. He contrasts Homer's Ulysses, who employs lies and cunning without strict necessity, with Fenelon's Ulysses, who prioritizes truth and veracity even in perilous situations. The discussion extends to the Alcoran, where Hume contends that the Arabic words corresponding to moral virtues are inherently positive due to linguistic norms, regardless of the questionable moral content within the text.
The philosopher challenges the significance of delivering general precepts in ethics, asserting that recommending moral virtues merely reiterates what is implied by the terms themselves. Hume suggests that those who coined terms such as "charity" conveyed the precept "be charitable" more effectively than any legislator or prophet who included such maxims in their writings. He argues that expressions implying both blame and approbation are less susceptible to misinterpretation.
Hume shifts the focus to the quest for a "Standard of Taste." He expresses the human inclination to seek a rule that can reconcile various sentiments, provide decisions that confirm one sentiment while condemning another, and serve as a guide for evaluating aesthetic preferences.
Hume's exploration delves into the complexities of moral judgments influenced by sentiment and language. He questions the universality of moral harmony, suggesting that linguistic nuances and variations in cultural interpretations play a substantial role in shaping ethical perceptions. The section sets the stage for Hume's further inquiry into the nature of aesthetic judgments and the quest for a standard by which to evaluate taste.
The philosopher introduces a perspective that challenges the idea of establishing a universal standard for taste. He distinguishes between judgment and sentiment, asserting that while all sentiments are inherently right because they refer only to the individual experiencing them, judgments of the understanding may be incorrect as they involve a reference to external reality.
Hume argues that among various opinions on the same subject, there is typically only one that is just and true, making it challenging to ascertain the correct determination. In contrast, he contends that a multitude of sentiments, all inspired by the same object, are considered right because each represents a subjective conformity or relation between the object and the observer's mental faculties.
The philosopher further asserts that beauty is not an intrinsic quality residing in objects but is rather a product of the mind contemplating them. Different individuals may perceive different beauties or even deformities in the same object, and Hume advises that each person should embrace their own sentiment without attempting to impose it on others. He likens the pursuit of real beauty or deformity to the futile quest for determining the real sweet or real bitter, asserting that such inquiries are inherently fruitless.
Hume acknowledges a common sense axiom that supports the idea that tastes can vary widely and that individuals should not dispute matters of taste. However, he introduces a modification, suggesting that there is a form of common sense that opposes this principle, particularly in cases where comparing objects of vastly different quality or stature. He uses the example of asserting an equality of genius between authors like Ogilby and Milton or Bunyan and Addison, highlighting that common sense readily dismisses such extreme claims as absurd and ridiculous.
Hume's argument questions the possibility of establishing a universal standard of taste by emphasizing the inherent subjectivity of sentiments and the diversity of individual judgments. He acknowledges a certain level of common sense in recognizing the natural equality of tastes in some instances but introduces a caveat when dealing with objects of considerable disproportion, where extreme claims are readily dismissed. The section contributes to Hume's exploration of the challenges in defining a standard of taste and the complexities of aesthetic judgments.
Then the philosopher explores the nature of rules in artistic composition and the challenges in establishing a universal standard of taste. Hume asserts that the rules of composition in the arts, including poetry and eloquence, are not derived from a priori reasoning or abstract conclusions of the understanding. Instead, they are rooted in experience and general observations concerning what has universally pleased across different cultures and epochs.
He acknowledges the presence of falsehood and fiction in many artistic expressions, such as hyperboles and metaphors, asserting that attempting to restrict artistic expression to geometrical truth would be contrary to the laws of criticism. Hume argues that even though some writers may please despite transgressions of rules, their success is often due to possessing other beauties that align with just criticism.
The philosopher introduces the idea that pleasure derived from art is not solely dependent on adherence to rules but can result from the force of expression, inventiveness, and natural portrayal of emotions. He uses the example of Ariosto, whose work might be criticized for its bizarre elements, yet it still pleases due to the clarity of expression and the portrayal of emotions.
Hume emphasizes the subjective and delicate nature of aesthetic sentiments, suggesting that not every individual's feelings will align with general rules of art. He explains that the success of an artistic experiment depends on various circumstances, including the proper time, place, and disposition of the observer's mind.
Furthermore, Hume discusses the endurance of artistic works over time, asserting that genuine genius stands the test of time and transcends changes in climate, government, religion, and language. He contrasts enduring admiration for works like Homer's with the transient success of poets or orators whose reputation may be influenced by authority or prejudice but ultimately fades when examined by posterity or foreigners.
Hume contends that the rules of artistic composition are grounded in experience and common sentiments but are not universally applicable to every individual. He highlights the enduring power of genuine genius, suggesting that it maintains its authority over the minds of people across different cultures and historical periods. The passage underscores the complexity of aesthetic judgments and the challenges in establishing fixed rules for artistic creation.
Then, the philosopher examines the existence of general principles of approbation and blame in matters of taste. Hume posits that certain forms or qualities, originating from the internal structure of the mind, are inherently designed to please or displease. He likens this to a sound and defective state within each individual, where the former serves as a true standard of taste and sentiment.
Acknowledging that the influence of these general principles can be hindered by defects in the internal organs, Hume explores the variability in people's perception of beauty or deformity. He attributes the lack of proper sentiment for beauty to a deficiency in the delicacy of imagination, a quality he attempts to define more accurately.
Hume employs a story from Don Quixote to illustrate delicacy of taste, comparing it to a judgment in wine. The story involves individuals detecting subtle tastes like leather or iron in a hogshead of wine, ultimately justified by the discovery of an old key with a leathern thong at the bottom. Hume contends that those with a delicate taste can discern minute qualities, even in disorder.
Drawing a parallel between bodily and mental taste, Hume argues that delicacy of taste is crucial for discerning the finer emotions and nuances in art and literature. He introduces the idea that general rules of beauty are useful in instances of established models, where single, high-degree qualities please or displease. However, if the same qualities are presented in a smaller degree or mixed and confounded, they may not affect the organs with sensible delight or uneasiness, excluding the individual from pretensions to delicacy.
Hume emphasizes the importance of having avowed patterns or general rules of composition, comparing it to finding the key with the leathern thong in the wine story. Such principles, according to him, help prove the superiority of one's judgment and reveal the fault in those lacking delicacy.
Hume underscores the significance of delicacy of taste as the perfection of mental taste, allowing individuals to perceive minute objects and discern every beauty or blemish in any composition. He argues that the perfection of a sense or faculty lies in its ability to notice the smallest details, an attribute desirable for a delicate taste of wit or beauty, as it leads to the finest and most innocent enjoyments.
Hume in his "Of the Standard of Taste," then delves into the importance of practice, comparison, and the avoidance of prejudice in refining one's taste and judgment of beauty.
Hume argues that practice in a particular art and frequent exposure to a specific species of beauty are essential for improving one's ability to discern and appreciate beauty. He suggests that initial encounters with objects of beauty are often obscure and confused, leading to hesitant judgments. However, with experience, individuals develop a clearer and more precise sentiment, allowing them to distinguish the merits and defects of each part of a composition.
Moreover, Hume emphasizes the necessity of comparison in forming judgments of beauty. By comparing different species and degrees of excellence, individuals can better understand the proportion and value of each. Through comparison, even seemingly inferior works can be appreciated, and the merits of a composition can be properly assessed.
Furthermore, Hume discusses the role of prejudice in distorting one's judgment of beauty. He warns against allowing personal biases or preconceptions to influence one's evaluation of a work. Instead, he advocates for approaching each work with an open mind and considering it on its own merits, free from external influences.
Hume also highlights the importance of good sense and reason in the appreciation of beauty. He argues that individuals must possess a clear understanding of the purpose and design of a work in order to properly assess its beauty. Additionally, he suggests that sound judgment and delicate sentiment are essential qualities of a true critic of the arts.
Hume contends that while the principles of taste are universal, few individuals possess the qualifications necessary to serve as true judges of beauty. He acknowledges the difficulty in identifying such individuals but maintains that their existence is undeniable. Despite the challenges in determining the standard of taste, Hume asserts that the enduring popularity of works of beauty serves as evidence of their intrinsic merit, contrasting them with the shifting opinions of abstract philosophy and theology.
Hume continues his exploration of taste, asserting that individuals with delicate taste are easily distinguished by the soundness of their understanding and superior faculties. He argues that their influence in society gives prevalence to the lively approbation with which they receive works of genius.
The philosopher notes that while general principles of taste are uniform in human nature, variations arise from different humors and the manners and opinions of a given age and country. Hume acknowledges that some judgment diversity is unavoidable when blameless differences exist, and no preference can be assigned.
He introduces the concept of age-related preferences, suggesting that a young person may favor amorous and tender images, while an older individual appreciates philosophical reflections. Personal temperament plays a significant role, with one's inclination towards the sublime, the tender, or raillery influencing preferences.
Hume argues that preferences in writing styles are often inherent, citing individual affinities for simplicity, ornament, conciseness, or richness in expression. While recognizing the innocence of such preferences, he warns against critics restricting their approval to one style, advocating for an understanding and appreciation of various genres.
Cultural context also affects taste. Hume observes that people are more pleased with pictures and characters resembling those in their own age or country, making comedy less transferable across different times and nations. He reflects on the difficulty of reconciling oneself to the simplicity of ancient manners and how audiences are naturally drawn to works reflecting their familiar customs.
Touching upon the ancient vs. modern learning controversy, Hume argues for acknowledging and appreciating the peculiarities of manners in the works of the ancients, provided they are innocent. However, he distinguishes these peculiarities from representations of vicious manners without proper censure, which he sees as genuine deformities.
Hume extends this argument to the depiction of characters with a lack of humanity and decency in ancient poetry. He contends that the insensitivity to moral principles in certain characters diminishes the merit of the works, giving modern authors an advantage.
The philosopher delves into the excusability of speculative errors concerning religion in works of genius. He distinguishes between harmless theological principles and those that become overly dogmatic, leading to the author's bias impinging on the composition's merit.
Hume contends that moral principles are more resistant to change than speculative opinions. He suggests that allowing for innocent peculiarities of manners but not compromising on moral principles is crucial, emphasizing that one's moral standard should not be distorted for the sake of accommodating a particular writer's views.
The discussion extends to religious bigotry, particularly in Roman Catholicism, where hatred toward other worship is portrayed as divine heroism in tragedies and epic poems. Hume finds such sentiments blameable, even if they reflect the zealotry of a particular faith, and criticizes works where intemperate zeal becomes the predominant character of heroes.
The philosopher concludes with a reflection on the intrusion of religious principles into polite compositions. He argues against the excuse of adhering to customs burdened by religious ceremonies, pointing out that it remains ridiculous for poets to compare their lovers to religious figures or to intertwine superstition into sentiments unrelated to religion.
Hume explores the diverse sources of variation in taste, including individual temperament, cultural context, and the impact of religion. He emphasizes the importance of open-mindedness and the acknowledgment of differing preferences while maintaining a moral standard unaffected by prevailing biases.
Also visit : LITERARY SPHERE
#tasteaccordingtohume #davidhumesviewonaesthetictaste #aesthetictasteaccordingtohume #culturalstudiesinenglishliterature #purposeofseekingtoestablishastandardtaste #davidhume #davidhumeofthestandardoftaste #davidhumeofthestandardoftastesummary #davidhumeofthestandardoftasteanalysis #davidhumeofthestandardoftasteexplanation #ofthestandardoftastebydavidhume #ofthestandardoftastebydavidhumesummary #ofthestandardoftastebydavidhumeanalysis #davidhumeonbeauty #humesphilosophyoftaste #davidhumesphilosophy #davidhumesphilosophyoftaste #TheStandardofTasteinDavidHume’sPhilosophy #davidhumecriticaltheory #summaryofdavidhumeofthestandardoftaste #analysisofdavidhumeofthestandardoftaste
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
Explanation of David Hume's essay, "Of the Standard of Taste"
0 Comments