FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2008056633> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2008056633 endingPage "38" @default.
• W2008056633 startingPage "18" @default.
• W2008056633 abstract "18 HUME AND THE STANDARD OF TASTE David Hume's critical theories, although fragmentary , have drawn increasingly serious attention in the twentieth century, yet even in 1976 Peter Jones, in reassessing Hume's aesthetics, can describe one of the most substantial of his critical essays, Of the Standard of Taste, as underrated. Jones praises it as subtle and highly complex, but while I agree with that judgment I also find the essay quite puzzling. I am struck by certain features which look like structural weaknesses and by what seem to be inconsistencies, even contradictions , in Hume's argument. But perhaps the gravest difficulty facing interpretation of this essay is the irony which Hume seems to use, for this raises the question of just how seriously we are to take some of the more conventional views contained in Of the Standard of Taste. I can begin to illustrate my uneasiness by considering Hume's use of a tall tale from Don Quixote, Part II, chapter xiii. Hume introduces this in a lighthearted way as part of his definition of delicacy of taste. It is the story of Sancho Panza's two kinsmen, who are such sensitive judges of wine that they can detect the taint of iron and leather imparted to a hogshead by the presence in it of a key on a thong. Now there are some interesting differences between Hume's version of this tale and the original. For example, where Hume has the two tasters deliberate over their wine before pronouncing it good, except for the slight taste of leather or iron, Cervantes says the first merely tried it with the tip of his tongue and the second just sniffed it, without tasting any at all. Further, Hume says both 2 were ridiculed for their judgment, but there is no such 19 reaction mentioned in the original. Lastly, Hume calls the cause of the taint of iron an old key, where 3 Cervantes describes it as little. In short, while in the original interest is in the sensitivity of the taste of Sancho' s kinsmen for its own sake, Hume's emphasis is more on the relation of their taste to that of other people. He makes the procedure of tasting the wine as normal as possible and he gives prominence to the reactions of other people. Hume both tones down the more fabulous aspects of the story, making it less extraordinary and hence a better starting-point for a generalization about taste, and makes more explicit the conflict of opinion about the wine. He is using the story not just to define delicacy of taste but also to relate it to the problem of aesthetic judgment and the standard of taste. This is confirmed by the application Hume makes of his example. First, he uses the analogy between physical and aesthetic taste to claim that delicacy in both consists of the ability to detect minute effects and make fine discriminations. But the crucial question is what serves, like the key on the thong in the story, to confirm to outsiders that a man's aesthetic judgment is in fact more delicate than his neighbours'. Hume's answer is the general rules of beauty ... to produce these general rules or avowed patterns of composition is like finding the key with the leathern thong; which justified the verdict of Sancho' s kinsmen, and confounded those pretended judges who had condemned them (273). But of course producing a general rule is not exactly like finding a physical key on a thong, and Hume's use of the word avowed here, which he repeats later, raises the difficulty of how the principles of art become accepted, and by whom. But, that apart, there is something odd about the discussion since the avowed principle is used, with support from examples, to 20 convince a bad critic that he is wrong, on the grounds that his judgment does not accord with the general judgment. This is the opposite of Sancho's story, in which his kinsmen were in a minority, derided, adds Hume, by the dull majority, and only vindicated by the discovery of the tainting key and thong. The aesthetic equivalent of..." @default.
• W2008056633 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2008056633 creator A5064441822 @default.
• W2008056633 date "1986-01-01" @default.
• W2008056633 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2008056633 title "Hume and the Standard of Taste" @default.
• W2008056633 cites W1484944139 @default.
• W2008056633 cites W1513104673 @default.
• W2008056633 cites W1991474948 @default.
• W2008056633 cites W2062302577 @default.
• W2008056633 cites W2318884539 @default.
• W2008056633 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/hms.2011.0640" @default.
• W2008056633 hasPublicationYear "1986" @default.
• W2008056633 type Work @default.
• W2008056633 sameAs 2008056633 @default.
• W2008056633 citedByCount "8" @default.
• W2008056633 countsByYear W20080566332012 @default.
• W2008056633 countsByYear W20080566332014 @default.
• W2008056633 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2008056633 hasAuthorship W2008056633A5064441822 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C2779975665 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C2781059922 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C527412718 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C8868529 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C107038049 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C111472728 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C124952713 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C138885662 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C142362112 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C15744967 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C169760540 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C185592680 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C18903297 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C2779975665 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C2781059922 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C41895202 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C527412718 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C55493867 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C86803240 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C8868529 @default.
• W2008056633 hasConceptScore W2008056633C98184364 @default.
• W2008056633 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2008056633 hasLocation W20080566331 @default.
• W2008056633 hasOpenAccess W2008056633 @default.
• W2008056633 hasPrimaryLocation W20080566331 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W1990110528 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W2068931236 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W2089801293 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W2108611755 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W2141014878 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W2329773928 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W2330111143 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W3094245317 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W3094546236 @default.
• W2008056633 hasRelatedWork W3128930256 @default.
• W2008056633 hasVolume "12" @default.
• W2008056633 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2008056633 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2008056633 magId "2008056633" @default.
• W2008056633 workType "article" @default.