This week we take up the issue of the basis of aesthetic value. The debate is typically framed as "objectivity vs. subjectivity" in aesthetic value. So one preliminary consideration is to think about what those terms seem to mean in your own usage of "objectivity" and "subjectivity." As always in good reasoning, the first challenge is to explore the meaning of the key terminology.
The reading by Hume is not easy, but this essay is extremely important and continues to receive considerable philosophical attention: "Of the Standard of Taste" http://www.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/361r15.html
Print out the questions and use those as you work through the article to grasp the elements of his argument. The key question for us is the last one (#19): Has Hume proposed an acceptable resolution of objectivity vs. subjectivity? Does his approach work? What about his approach is unsatisfactory?
Very roughly, we might think of "objectivity" in aesthetic value as the view that the value of a work somehow exists "in" the object, such that all observers, with enough dialogue and debate, might theoretically come to some agreement about its value. "Subjectivity" in aesthetic value suggests, in contrast, that the value we perceive in a work is somehow in "us," a matter of our individual taste. The cliche, "There's no debating taste" suggests that, just as our taste for food and cars and clothing varies by our personal taste, so does our assessment of aesthetic value.
In favor of objectivity is the observation that we so often do agree on what counts as good art. Yes, there is plenty of disagreement, but there is also remarkable agreement. We especially see this agreement among people (including most of the class) who have looked at/heard/perceived a lot of art and made comparative judgments that one artist is "better" than another. One challenge for objectivists is to explain where these standards come from -- is it just cultural bias? are we all just brainwashed to think that Picasso or Stravinsky or Baryshnikov or Balanchine are "great"? If they are all "great" artists, on what basis are we coming to that conclusion? Can we articulate what those standards are that lead us to the conclusion that certain artists are "great"?
In favor of subjectivity is the observation of enormous disagreement in our assessments of aesthetic value. We don't seem to have any reasonable way to resolve those disagreements. We keep changing our minds over time. Our judgments often seem very arbitrary, personal, and based on our own individual "taste." We don't seem to be able to articulate any standards or yardsticks that would explain value that we'd all agree with.
Hume proposes a theory that centers on human taste (which would put him into the "subjectivist" camp) but he attempts to explain why it is that we move toward agreement in evaluating so much art. The challenge for us this week is to understand the elements of that theory and assess what we think of his proposal.
DISCUSSION LEADERS: Joao is leading the Plato discussion on moral value and aesthetic value. Jon is leading the discussion on Hume. Walter will be doing one of the articles on NEA and free speech. As you will remember, the graduate students have some additional course requirements, so if they seem particularly "aggressive" in following up on your comments, that's why.
COLLABRA PROBLEMS: Collabra has been off-line Sunday afternoon, April 19. One guess is that they're doing maintenance on the server. If you can't get through, either check back later or send me your comment as an e-mail and I'll post it later when the group is back on-line.
FINAL PROJECT: Please take a good look at the final project assignment if you haven't already. Don't let this slide too long. http://www.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/361/361_a5.html
SHORT PAPER III: I'll post the final short paper assignment on Monday, April 27, with a due date Wednesday, May 13. It will be a little shorter and easier than the first two, but I need to have you formally write something about the topics in Unit III.
UNIVERSITY WITHDRAWAL DEADLINE: Please remember that the University deadline for dropping any course is this Friday, April 24. You need the signature of both the instructor and the department chair. If you're dropping one of my courses, leave the form in my faculty mailbox no later than this Wednesday, 4/22 and I'll pass it along to our department chair.
Continue to Lecture Notes for Week Thirteen (posted 4/27/98)
Return to Lecture Notes Table of Contents
Return to Class Home Page: PHIL 361/599 (Spring 1998)
Questions and comments are welcome: jvancamp@csulb.edu
This page written and maintained by Julie Van Camp
Copyright Julie C. Van Camp 1998
Last updated: April 19, 1998