In his piece on the standard of taste, Hume seems to contradict himself numerous times. He asserts that there is a very wide distinction between sentiment and judgment. “All sentiment is right; because sentiment has a reference to nothing beyond itself, and is always real, wherever a man is conscious of it. But all determinations of the understanding are not right; because they have a reference to something beyond themselves, to wit, real matter of fact; and are not always conformable to that standard” (The Nature of Art, 42). While this claim does make some sense, I do not agree with Hume’s view that sentiment and judgment do not go hand in hand. Often times we make judgments about things based on how they make us feel (which is our sentiment). For example, when I look at a piece of art I might feel inspired and awe struck, and I would judge this particular piece as quality work. Someone else looking at the same piece, may feel disgusted and therefore judge the artwork to be inferior. Opinions cannot be right or wrong, they are simply opinions.
Hume does acknowledge that “though all the general rules of art are founded only on experience and on the observation of the common sentiments of human nature, we must not imagine, that, on every occasion, the feelings of men will be conformable to these rules” (The Nature of Art, 43). My question is: if the sentiments of men do not always fit into the “rules of art” than why are their standards and rules for how art should be judged? Hume says himself, that “beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty” (The Nature of Art, 42). When determining whether a work of art is beautiful, there is simply no standard of judgment because beauty is in the eye of the beholder. However, when contemplating whether a piece of art is good or bad we are expected to put our sentiments aside and conform to standards of judgment. This is perplexing to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment