The proposal has been criticized on the grounds that it posits a viciously circular analysis of aesthetic value. Aesthetically superior art works are those endorsed, endorsed by true critics. But how do we know if theyre like, if these people are correctly identifying beautiful thing? We would have to already know what was beautiful so that we could identify the good judges. So here is quoting from the por encyclopaedia entry: "So you know that something is beautifus, like an epistemich claim"
Many of us think that art is subjective, but at the same time it seems like some artistic judgments are better than others. Do you think Crash deserved to receive an award for Best Picture? Did you like Season 2 of Ted Lasso? Well you’re wrong. So how do we reconcile these two conflicting attitudes about art? David and Tamler turn to David Hume’s classic essay Of the Standard of Taste (link in notes) for help. Will Pizarro finally see the error of his ways on Straw Dogs?
Plus a doozy of a medical ethics paper – should we allow people to change their legal age if it doesn’t match their "biological" and "emotional" age?
Sponsored By:
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links: