The Chief Business of the True Judges in Hume’s Standard of Taste
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9467729 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Byoungjae Kim (0000-0001-9673-0048, Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 64 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 585-602 |
| Publication date | 2024-07-16 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The British Journal of Aesthetics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0904 • E-ISSN: 1468-2842 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/aesthj/ayae009 |
| OpenAlex | W4400691166 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 16 |
In his essay ‘Of the Standard of Taste’, Hume identifies two standards of taste: the general rules of art and the joint verdict of true judges. From this the following questions arise: Why did Hume present two standards? And, how should we understand the relation between them? We must first get a firmer grasp on each of the standards that Hume presents. Hence, this paper has two main goals. The first is to understand the general rules of art in the light of Hume’s philosophical method, which is consonant with Newtonian methods of analysis and synthesis. The second is to provide a new interpretation of what Hume takes to be the joint verdict of true judges. In my interpretation, the joint verdict of true judges constitutes the standard of taste, not because their verdicts converge, but because their verdicts encompass blameless differences. With this new foundation for understanding the two standards, I will present my own reading of the relation between them
Taste · Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology · Historical Philosophy and Science · Neuroscience · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Psychology
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |