Textual Reflection on Hume

David Hume’s Of the Standard of Taste discusses the relativity of taste. He concludes this from the assumption that the good or beauty of a work of art is identical to the human response it provokes. Hume goes about this by focusing more on the subject than the object the subject is viewing. He offers the idea that there are two sources for varying tastes: sentiment and critical facility. Hume states “the sentiments of men often differ with regard to beauty and deformity of all kinds, even while their general discourse is the same” (1). This leads to the idea that it is more common to have differences among men in generals compared to particulars and less in reality than in appearance. One of the reasons people’s opinions differ is because of the nature of language. Different people ascribe different meanings to words. However, “the word virtue, with its equivalent in every tongue, implies praise; as that of vice does blame” (1). He goes onto show that there is “no steady rule of right” (2) and “every action is blamed or praised, so far only as it is beneficial or hurtful to the true believers” (2) but there needs to be a rule from which we can judge what is right and wrong and what is good and bad. Therefore, it “is natural for us to seek a Standard of Taste” (1) because it is through this that people can reconcile sentiments. Hume is careful to differentiate judgment from sentiment. While “all sentiment is right; because sentiment has a reference to nothing beyond itself, and is always real” (2), judgments are not always rights because they are “determinations of the understanding” (2) and they refer to something beyond themselves so they cannot be conformable to the standard. As sentiment is presented, it is possible for multiple sentiments about one singular object to be right because sentiments don’t represent “what is really in the object” (2). This fits in well with Hume’s method of focusing more on the subject. Linked to the sentiments is beauty. Beauty exists in the mind and is not a quality of the object. If a person thinks something is beautiful, it is not because the thing itself possesses beauty but the mind perceives beauty. This is also an attempt to explain why different people think different things are beautiful and to different degrees. Also, this supports the claim that “every individual ought to acquiesce in his own sentiment, without pretending to regulate those of others” (2). He next goes onto talk about the role that experiences play in the rules of composition. If people can only judge things against one’s own experience then it is logical that people’s ideas of beauty would vary. Hume outlines some requirements for the foundation to judge. He says “a perfect serenity of mind, a recollection of thought, a due attention to the object; if any of these circumstances be wanting, our experiment will be fallacious, and we shall be unable to judge of the catholic and universal beauty. The relation, which nature has places between the form and the sentiment will at least be more obscure; and it will require greater accuracy to trace and discern it” (3). A person needs to be able to draw from experiences in order to recognize beauty. Critics need to be able to distinguish properties that come together and evaluate how they work together to produce the finished product. Obstructions detract from the sentiments and when they “are removed, the beauties…immediately display their energy and while the world endures, they maintain their authority over the minds of men” (4). With no hindrances, critics will be left to their refined senses and ability to engage in experiences from which they can base their future determinations off of. Another important point Hume makes is his acknowledgement that “the perfection of the man, and the perfection of the sense or feeling, are found to be united” (5). A taste for beauty, according to Hume, is “the source of all the finest and most innocent enjoyments, of which human nature is susceptible” (5). The standard of taste is so important because the most efficient way to ascertain this type of enjoyment is by appealing to “models and principles, which have been established by the uniform consent and experience of nations and ages” (5). In order for a work of art (object) to fully have the opportunity to produce an effect on a person’s mind, the viewer (subject) must have “a certain point of view, and not be fully relished by persons, whose situation, real or imaginary, is not comfortable to that which is required by the performance” (6). As strong as Hume advocates for his theory, he concedes that “a certain degree of diversity in judgment is unavoidable” (8) and it would be unrealistic to seek a standard that does not posses some bias. Interestingly, Hume provides a type of guide for men to be better judges of taste but he never clearly explicates what that good taste is. Perhaps this is due to the variety in taste he mentions. In summary, Hume provides a method for judging based on experiences and heavily focuses on the viewer (subject) as opposed to the object.