Of the Standard of Taste and Other Essays

Of the Standard of Taste and Other Essays❮EPUB❯ ✻ Of the Standard of Taste and Other Essays ✶ Author David Hume – Bluevapours.co.uk IntroductionSelected BibliographyNote on the TextOf the standard of tasteOf the delicacy of taste passion Of tragedy Of essay writing Of simplicity refinement in writingOf refinement in the artsOf elo IntroductionSelected BibliographyNote Standard of Kindle Ö on the TextOf the standard of tasteOf the delicacy of taste passion Of Of the PDF/EPUB or tragedy Of essay writing Of simplicity refinement in writingOf refinement in the artsOf elouence Of the the Standard of Epub µ rise progress of the arts sciences Of the study of historyThe epicureanThe stoic The platonistThe sceptic the Standard of Taste and PDF \ Of the dignity or meanness of human nature Of superstition enthusiasmOn suicide On the immortality of the soulTextual Notes variants.

David Hume Standard of Kindle Ö was a Scottish historian philosopher economist diplomat and essayist known today especially for Of the PDF/EPUB or his radical philosophical empiricism and scepticismIn light of Hume's central role in the Scottish Enlightenment and the Standard of Epub µ in the history of Western philosophy Bryan Magee judged him as a philosopher widely regarded as the Standard of Taste and PDF \ the greatest who has ever written in the English language While Hume fa.

Of the Standard of Taste and Other Essays PDF/EPUB ¿
  • Paperback
  • 211 pages
  • Of the Standard of Taste and Other Essays
  • David Hume
  • English
  • 15 November 2014
  • 9780023278006

10 thoughts on “Of the Standard of Taste and Other Essays

  1. Mehmet B says:

    Felsefeden kaynaklanan önemli avantajlardan biri batıl inançlara ve sahte dinlere karşı işe yarayan güçlü panzehirde yatar Bu baş belası hastalıklara karşı fayda eden başka tek bir ilaç yoktur olanı varsa da kesinliği şüphelidir Soyut akıl yürütmelerle hiçbir gerçek olgu veya varlık meselesi çözülemezİçinde bulunulan zamanı suçlayıp geçmişe hayranlık duymak insan doğasında köklü yeri olan bir tavırdır ve en derin yargı gücüne en geniş eğitim öğrenime sahip insanları bile etkileyebilmektedir

  2. Matthew Ledrew says:

    In reading the work of the great critical thinkers one on top of the other one cannot help but stack their various lines of reasoning atop one another and shuffle them almost as a deck of cards Ideas stick together and become conflated with one another and become new ideas; possibly ideas that run contrary to either author’s original intent Reading David Hume’s Of the Standard of Taste so soon after reading Alexander Pope’s Essay on Criticism one cannot hope but mingle Pope’s argument that “if you don’t know what you’re talking about you should shut up” with Hume’s statements about the natures of beauty and taste This essay will explore the idea of if when read together the underlying message of Pope and Hume can be said to be that only a positive critical analysis is correct and relevant analysisIn Of the Standard of Taste Hume rights “All sentiment is right; because sentiment has a reference to nothing beyond itself and is always real wherever a man is conscious of it” Hume # This statement is key to Hume’s argument as it allows the critic or reader the permission with which to speak with authority upon works that have elicited a sentimental emotional reaction from them This also harkens back to Longinus’s musings in On Sublimity The three can be read together create a self perpetuating ‘permission slip’ for positive criticism which I envision to be like a recycling symbol Longinus argues that one of the ways in which a piece of art can be defined as great is if it causes “inspiration of vehement emotion” Longinus 181 with ‘Vehement’ defined as “showing strong feeling; forceful passionate or intense” Google Definitions What this boils down to is that one of the defining principles of ‘art’ is that it brings about an emotional response The presence of this emotional reaction has granted to art validity to be brought into the realm of criticism The next stage would be to validate the critic can the viewer speak with authority on this work? Because Hume states that “All sentiment is right” these two things happen instantaneously The moment a work brings about an emotional reaction the work is validated as art and the viewer is validated as a critic The presence of an emotional reaction provides anyone with the ability to speak with authority under Pope’s rules for criticismWhen Hume spoke of sentiment was he speaking of sentimentality? The two seem to mean the same but are vastly different Sentimentality speaks to over romanticizing and soppiness where sentiment simply means “a view of or attitude toward a situation or event; an opinion” or “a feeling or emotion” Google Definitions both Does this in turn provide validation and authority to negative emotions spurred by a work as well? Are negative feelings ‘always right and always real’ as Hume stated? Hume guards against this reading with his very next statement “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” Hume # Here Hume states that while the emotion re sentiment itself is always correct our understanding of our own emotional selves and the reasons for those emotions are not In this way Hume pushes toward a greater understanding of the self through the art as it is viewed To use a personal example why does The Time Machine by HG Wells bother men and elicit a negative emotional response from me? Is it fair for me to use the position of critical authority granted to me by my emotional reaction to state uneuivocally that The Time Machine is ‘bad art’? Is Hume even speaking of the baser negative emotions when he grants the viewer this authority to speak? His statement “Beauty is no uality in things themselves It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty” Hume # implies that he does not Hume’s use of the word ‘beauty’ implies that he did not intend ‘sentiment’ to be a shorthand for all emotions but rather as a shorthand for sentimentality meaning that only positive emotions finding a piece of art beautiful is an acceptable emotional response which gives a viewer permission to become a critic and even then only a strict understanding of why the art provided you with that emotional reaction and an analysis of those reasons truly provide you with the authority to speak on the subject Would I be allowed to speak on The Time Machine at all according to Hume as I do not find it beautiful I find it to be in fact uite ugly?I believe it is from the paradox of this sort of reading that the Freudian method of literary analysis was eventually born from specifically Freud’s fixation with ‘The Uncanny’ Freud takes an view that seems in opposition to Hume focusing not on the positive emotional ualities elicited by a work but on the negative ones At the crux of a Freudian Analysis is the idea that the reader or critic must take whatever bothered them most about a work that which is uncanny to them and then structure their understanding of the work in such a way that this is what the work was about This sort of emotional understanding of the self as a method of critiue harkens back to Hume’s statement “But all determinations of the understanding are not right” but with specific focus on the negative aspects of emotion To return to the above example Under Freud’s guide I realize that what bothered me about The Time Machine was the depictions of a European man traveling to ‘another time’ and judging the people there to either be primitive or savage Through this realization I conclude that my subjective analysis of The Time Machine is that it is thematically an allegory for colonization Did Hume intend for only positive emotions to be provided the authority through which to speak when he wrote Of the Standard of Taste? It is possible that he wrote this chiefly as a way to deflate the sort of negative criticism that has long been sensationalized by giving authority only to those who spoke positively and through analysis

  3. A Young Philosopher says:

    I read these essays around a year ago and did not find them very memorable From what I remember Hume emphasizes that luxury is not a vice but the outcome of a highly functioning society I suppose I am just not into deep philosophical thought in very specific issues I prefer wide scoping works

  4. Fraser says:

    “Of the Standard of Taste”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *