David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
British Journal of Aesthetics 51 (2):213-222 (2011)
Hume is plausibly interpreted as asserting that an artwork is beautiful if and only if it pleases ideal critics. Jerrold Levinson maintains that Hume's commitment to this biconditional gives rise to a problem that occurs neither to Hume nor to his any of his interpreters—the problem of explaining why you should care what pleases ideal critics if you are not one yourself. I argue that this problem arises only if you hold an empiricist theory of aesthetic value—that is, a theory that reduces the aesthetic value of a work to the value of the experience it affords—as Levinson does. I argue that Levinson's own attempted solution to the problem cannot succeed. And I argue that the problem never arises for Hume because his commitment to the biconditional is not a commitment to an empiricist theory of aesthetic value, but to an empiricist theory of aesthetic evaluation
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Michael Watkins & James Shelley (2012). Response-Dependence About Aesthetic Value. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 93 (3):338-352.
Dorit Barchana‐Lorand (2015). Educating Sentiment: Hume's Contribution to the Philosophy of the Curriculum Regarding the Teaching of Art. Journal of Philosophy of Education 49 (1):107-128.
Similar books and articles
Michelle Mason (2001). Moral Prejudice and Aesthetic Deformity: Rereading Hume's "of the Standard of Taste". Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 59 (1):59-71.
Stephen J. Boulter (2002). Hume on Induction: A Genuine Problem or Theology's Trojan Horse? Philosophy 77 (1):67-86.
James Shelley (2004). Hume's Principles of Taste: A Reply to Dickie. British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (1):84-89.
Yumiko Inukai (2012). James's Answer to Hume: The Empirical Basis of the Unified Self. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (2):363-389.
Elisa Galgut (2001). The Poetry and the Pity: Hume's Account of Tragic Pleasure. British Journal of Aesthetics 41 (4):411-424.
Steven M. Bayne (2007). Hume on Miracles: Would It Take a Miracle to Believe in a Miracle? Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (1):1-29.
Brian Ribeiro (2007). Hume's Standard of Taste and the de Gustibus Sceptic. British Journal of Aesthetics 47 (1):16-28.
Ruth Weintraub (2008). A Problem for Hume's Theory of Induction. Hume Studies 34 (2):169-187.
Adrian Bardon (2007). Empiricism, Time-Awareness, and Hume's Manners of Disposition. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 5 (1):47-63.
Lorraine Besser-Jones (2010). Hume on Pride-in-Virtue: A Reliable Motive? Hume Studies 36 (2):171-192.
Elijah Millgram (1995). Was Hume a Humean? Hume Studies 21 (1):75-94.
Added to index2011-04-15
Total downloads49 ( #52,341 of 1,700,318 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #269,935 of 1,700,318 )
How can I increase my downloads?