DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR HUME'S "OF THE STANDARD OF TASTE"

The discussion questions were written by Julie Van Camp. (Copyright Julie C. Van Camp 1997) They may be freely reproduced, so long as this complete citation is included with any such reproductions. 

The numbers following the questions refer you to the numbered paragraphs of the essay.

1. Hume begins by noting the wide variance among taste, even among people with "the same prejudices." What examples from your own experience might support his claim here? (#1-2)
2.  He contrasts our differences in "taste" with our disagreements in "opinion and science." How are the latter resolved? (#2) Is this a persuasive contrast?
3.  Hume considers various approaches to ethical standards and emphasizes the role of language in creating a seeming agreement in what constitutes moral behavior. Reasoning by analogy, could this explanation account for seeming agreements in evaluating art? (#3-5) 
4. Hume describes in detail a prevailing philosophical view in 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. Look for the passages in #7 where he marks out this distinction. In #8, he goes on to say that he rejects this view, even though it has been sanctioned as "common sense" by others. What arguments does he present here against this "common sense" view? 
5. Hume believes that all general rules of art are based on experience, not on a priori [prior to experience] reasoning. How does he explain this distinction in #9-10? Is it consistent with your own experience of art? 
6. In #11, Hume notes that the greatest works of art are appreciated in all times and places. Is this consistent with your own experiences of art? What examples can you think of from various art forms that seem to support Hume's observation here? 
7. In #12-16, 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. What examples does he give of times when human taste malfunctions? How do we know when our taste is functioning properly? In this important passage, Hume is attempting to explain how we can agree on what counts as "good" art, even though our assessments are founded in our "taste" or "sentiment." Has he succeeded? What is persuasive about his attempt? What is unsatisfying about his attempt? 
8. What are the similarities between "mental and bodily taste"? how does our understanding of "bodily taste" clarify our understanding of our appreciation of art? (#16) 
9. In #17, he suggests that we will know if our taste is functioning appropriately if our conclusions are consistent with experiences of other nations and ages. Does this explain why are so often agree on what counts as "great" art? Is this argument persuasive? If it is not, what is bothersome about Hume's argument here? 
10. In #18-20 he suggests that the way to develop our taste so it functions properly is "practice," by observing many works of art and by making comparisons among them. Is this consistent with your own experience in learning about art, especially art forms with which you were not familiar? After this "practice" are you confident that you can make reliable assessments of the quality of works in that genre of art? 
11. We are urged to avoid "prejudice" in assessing art (in #21-22). What does Hume mean by "prejudice" here? Is his advice realistic? What prejudices do we today bring to our appreciation of art? Can they be overcome? Is it possible to have a "pristine eye" free of all prejudice in appreciating art? 
12. Hume is confident that "the principles of taste" are "universal," but admits that it might be difficult to know whether we have perfected our taste, free of prejudice. (#23-25) What the difficulties in making this determination? Is Hume's
    confidence unjustified? 
13. Hume ridicules those who claim that we can find objective truth in philosophy and science, but not in our appreciation of art. How does he develop his argument? Is he persuasive? (#26-27) 
14. Hume says repeatedly that "general principles of taste are uniform in human nature," yet he acknowledges the great variations in our actual applications of our taste. What are his examples of these variations? Can these be overcome?
    (#28-31)
15.  Unacceptable moral content seems to Hume to lower the aesthetic value of some art works. (#32) What other philosophers have expressed such a view? Is this consistent with your own assessments of art? 
16. Hume criticizes those who excuse much religious art on the grounds that we should be more tolerant of religious diversity than other kinds of diversity. What examples does he give here to support his position? Do we in practice defer more generously to religious art from other cultures? Should we? (#34-36) 
17. The central notion in Hume's aesthetics is taste. No other authority for evaluating art exists other than taste, for Hume. Use the "find" command to review all the references to "taste" in this essay. What does he mean by this concept? Is it different in all people? 
18. Hume also relies on the notion of "sentiment" extensively. Use the "find" command to review all the references to "sentiment" in this essay. Is it synonymous with "taste"? If it seems to be used differently, what are the differences? 
19. In summary, Hume believes that, even though all of our knowledge comes from our experiences, yet we can explain agreement in aesthetic judgments because of uniformities in the human mind in the exercise of our taste. Has Hume reconciled subjectivity and objectivity? How persuasive is his approach to explaining evaluation in art? Does he explain your experience of evaluating art? Can you think of counter-examples which challenge Hume's approach?