Some Questions for Hume
(adapted from A. J. Drake's Teaching Resources)
"Of the Standard of Taste" (1757)
-
What contrast does Hume make between "matters of opinion and science" and matters pertaining to taste in art?
-
What kinds of terms, according to Hume, are "the least liable to be perverted or mistaken"? Why?
-
Why, according to Hume, do some philosophers rule out any chance of establishing an universal standard of taste? But what "species of common sense" does he say refutes this skeptical insistence, and what foundation underlies the "rules of composition"?
-
Why, in Hume's view, is it nonetheless not to be expected that "on every occasion" people will agree in their judgments of taste, even if there is a common standard?
-
What relationship between natural objects and the organs involved in taste does Hume assert? And how does Hume's Don Quixote anecdote help him illustrate what he means by "delicacy of taste" and underscore its importance to his affirmation that there is a valid standard of taste?
-
How does Hume suggest that we can discern a person's "delicacy of taste"? How can this delicacy be developed?
-
Why, in Hume's view, is "comparison" vital to good judgments involving taste? What kinds of comparisons is Hume referring?
-
Why, according to Hume, is reason or understanding a vital component of taste? What is almost bound to happen if the critic is deficient in that regard?
-
How does Hume summarize the "true standard of taste and beauty"? And how does he say that we may distinguish its rare possessor?
-
What contrast does Hume make between philosophical and theological precepts on the one hand and "the beauties of eloquence and poetry"?
-
What "two sources of variation" still need to be dealt with even after we admit that "the general principles of taste are uniform in human nature"? What pronouncement does Hume's reasoning lead him to make about these two variations?
-
When, according to Hume, is it imperative to find fault with the art of other times or places? Is there a potential difficulty with Hume's argument here? Explain.
-
Why isn't it usually fair, in Hume's opinion, to reproach writers for their religious convictions? When is it nonetheless necessary to do so?