Example research essay topic: Good Or Bad Good Sense - 1,522 words

NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote

It is very easy to recognize that there are differences in taste and beliefs among individuals. This is true for masses that have been raised and exposed to similar beliefs and biases, as well as for persons of different cultures. Taste, according to Hume, is the source of our judgments of natural and of moral beauty. (255) Since there are differences of taste among people, it would seem that beauty, which is an outcome of our taste, would be truly subjective. But after saying this thou, there seems to be an objective side to determining whether an object is beautiful.

For example, it is commonly agreed upon that a work of Georgia Okeeffe is more beautiful that a Camel Cigarette billboard. This objectivity is what Humes theory, Of the Standard of Taste, is based on. Hume believes that the standard of taste is a rule, by which the various sentiments of men may be reconciled; at least, a decision, afforded, confirming one sentiment, and condemning another. (257) Hume talks about the need for a standard of taste in art but the problem then comes how to determine the standard of taste. There are a few options for doing this.

The first option would be to compile a list of good characteristics and apply them to each work with a rating. Another possible alternative is to use the master works as at cannon. Lastly, the standard could be reached through a true critic. There are a few problems with the first two options. First, it would be hard to have a complete list of what would be good characteristics because it would just be to long. Another problem is that there are no theories of what makes a work beautiful.

There are rules of thumb, but they are rough and far from being exact. This leaves the standard to be determined by a true critic, which is the idea Hume had in mind. The critic that Hume suggests should have certain characteristics, and the absence of these qualifications would leave the reader incapable of experiencing the effect that a work actually has the power to produce. The first of these qualifications is delicacy of taste. What is meant by this is the ability to notice and to specify the formal features of a work, and to be pleased or displeased by such features as have been found as a rule to please or displease. Another qualification is practice.

Practice is an understanding with the type of the work under consideration, and with the individual work itself through repeated reviews. A third qualification is comparison. The critic must have had the chance of comparing works of different degrees of goodness. Fourthly, there is freedom from prejudice. One must not criticize or praise a work simply because it reflects attitudes and customs that do or do not accord with those of ones own nation or age. Finally, a critic must have good sense.

Good sense means the ability to understand relations between the elements of a work and the connecting reasoning. A person who meets all the stipulations of the profile above are thus able to perceive the full potential of a given work and are referred to as an ideal critic. Now that we have determined the qualifications of the ideal critic, what makes a perceiver with these characteristics an exceptional critic? Without these attributes the critic would not be an ideal critic because he or she would get a false impression of the true beauty of a particular work. A lack of delicacy would allow the inadequate critic to pass over finer details that may prove to be detracting. Consequently such a critic would proclaim an artwork beautiful when in reality a more delicate viewer would see its faults.

Practice is very important for a critic as it is with the execution of any work. A critic with a lack of practice will at best be hesitant and reserved in judgement, due to the confusion of being presented an object for the first time. But a critic with practice will be able to perceive the beauties and defects of each part and give suitable praise or blame without fear of failure. Indulging in practice spurs the formation of comparisons. Without the construction of comparisons, the critic may be na ve and have the tendency to be more influenced by a particular work than should be. The need of a freedom from prejudice is significant because the verdicts of judges should not be influenced by personal feelings.

For example, a critic should not decide a piece of artwork to be beautiful because a family member produced it. Without the possession of good sense the critic would not be able to perceive the beauties or blemishes. Lack of good sense also inhibits perception of the mutual relations and correspondence of parts, and comprehension of all of these parts and compare them with each other, in order to perceive the consistence and uniformity of the whole. (263) It is because of these reasons that a perceiver with these characteristics is thought to be superior in making judgements of beauty Since we have decided on the ideal critic to judge the beauty of artworks, the question arises why should we mind what such a critic deems artistically good or bad. Being among people interested in and inspired by art, we should care what such people observe as artistically good or bad, because the qualities of the ideal critic allow for an interpretation of the artwork as close as possible to that which the artist is trying to express.

The artist puts out his or her work and is the only one who really sees its beauty. This is due to the mindset of the artist, allowing for only stimulators needed to produce feelings of pleasure. But when the same work is shown to a person other than the artist, this person is at disadvantage to that of the artist himself. The viewer does not have the luxury of only needing stimulation from the artwork to produce the same pleasurable response.

Thus the viewer is examining an artwork with essential blanks in it. Therefore the ideal critic having the best qualities for interpretation can come the closest to seeing what the artist is portraying, and therefore is able to fill in the blanks. Those are blanks which people who do not possess these characteristics would not be able to fill in, and consequently determine the artwork inferior or prematurely beautiful would not be exact. When an ideal critic refers to an artwork as artistically bad, it is because these blanks are so big that the idea trying to be conveyed is unable to be fully perceived. It is for this reason that an art-interested person should have regard for the judgements of an ideal critic.

I think a better question than why should a person care about the verdicts of such an ideal critic is, why should and ordinary art-interested person strive to conform to the qualifications of such a judge? This question is one that is easily answered since we have established the ideal critic as the best judge of beauty. So any person who is interested in art would want to be the best critic they could possible be. This would lead them to strive to meet the requirements of the ideal critic. The closer a person comes to this theoretical profile, the closer they would be to perceiving the maximum potential of an artwork.

Not only can the ideal critic be a profile to strive for, but also using the judgements of such critics is a way in which a person looking to be an ideal critic can measure their progress and compare how close they are to such a profile. By this, I mean looking at works of art that have been judged to be artistically good by ideal critics and seeing if you can see the beauty in them. This exercise is very useful in that it will help provide the practice and comparison needed to become such an ideal critic. From Humes theory, Of the Standard of Taste, we find that the use of an ideal critic is the best way of determining a standard of taste. The ideal critic relies on five traits in order to determine the artistic value of a work. These qualities are delicacy, practice, comparison, freedom from prejudice, and good sense.

If any of these characteristics are missing from this profile the critic cannot be an ideal one. It is the opinions of the ideal critic that people should lesson to so that they get the best review of a work. It is also thought that people should strive to be more like the ideal critic, allowing them to see the maximum potential in the artwork presented to them. When a viewer becomes to being an ideal critic, they also move from a practical answer to the question of, what is beauty, which would be answered by asking an ideal critic. To a more semantic answer to this question, by experiencing a pleasurable response of high degree.

Research essay sample on Good Or Bad Good Sense