Thesis Hume’s ‘true judges’ are the best answer we have to whether taste can be wrong
Where it stands
Hume's essay "Of the Standard of Taste" (1757) is pinned to my shed wall, because I get tired of being told that taste is just opinion.
The story everyone remembers is from Don Quixote: Sancho's two kinsmen taste wine from a hogshead. One detects a hint of leather, the other a hint of iron. They're mocked, until the barrel is emptied and a key on a leather thong is found at the bottom. Both were right, and the mockers were wrong.
Hume's point is that some palates really are better: more delicate, more practised. And he describes the judges whose joint verdict sets the standard in one famous sentence:
Strong sense, united to delicate sentiment, improved by practice, perfected by comparison, and cleared of all prejudice, can alone entitle critics to this valuable character.
My thesis: this is still the best account we have of how taste can be wrong without beauty being a measurable property. Taste is a response, but responses can be better and worse informed, and there's a fact about whose is better. Attack it.