# Slides ### Today - A new topic, [[the Aesthetics of Design]] --- ## Form, Function, Beauty --- ### Modernism: Function Dictates Form - **"Form follows Function"** - Functionality leads to beauty - Design derives from purely functional elements - Functional design = Aesthetically satisfying --- ### Underdetermination of Form - **Critique:** Function alone cannot determine form - **[[David Pye]]:** "The shape of it is in no way imposed on [[the designer]]" - _Example:_ Ceilings could have multiple forms, not necessarily flat - **Historical Context:** Machine aesthetic from early Modernism - Functional design worked well for some objects (e.g., chairs), but [[not others]] (e.g., radios) - **Penny Sparke:** Some objects conceal functional components, challenging the Modernist claim --- ### Rebuttal - Modernists emphasize user interaction and interface - Function involves usability and user experience, [[not just]] internal components - The outer shell serves functional purposes by improving usability --- ### Function and [[Aesthetic Value]] --- ### Beauty - **Two Notions of Beauty:** - **Indefinable beauty:** Mysterious, subjective - Beauty is mysterious and subjective, a personal preference or ineffable quality. - **Specific characteristics:** Quantifiable, e.g., "golden ratio" - Defines beauty through specific, measurable attributes. - Fails to encompass all aspects of what is considered beautiful. --- ### The Aesthetic Attitude: Disinterestedness - **Jerome Stolnitz:** - Proposed that [[aesthetic appreciation]] requires disinterestedness. - Difficult to apply to design objects, where functionality is inherent. - **George Dickie:** - Argued that practical and aesthetic attitudes can coexist. - Supports appreciating [[design aesthetics]] within their functional context. --- ### Alternative Views - **[[Aesthetic Experience]] (Monroe Beardsley)** - Defined as intense, unified, complex - **Limitation:** Struggles to include mundane design objects - **[[Aesthetic Realism]]** - [[Aesthetic properties]] (e.g., elegance) emerge from perceptual properties (e.g., shape, color) - Beauty is not added, but emerges from design --- ## Kant! --- ### Kant’s Distinction: Free vs. [[Dependent Beauty]] - **[[Free Beauty]]:** Appreciated without concept of object - For works of art, nature - "Presupposes no concept of what [[the object]] ought to be" - **[[Dependent Beauty]]:** Involves recognizing object’s function - Beauty of a chair requires understanding of its intended use - "Does presuppose such a concept and the perfection of the object in accordance with it" --- ### Dependent Beauty v.1 - **Paul Guyer’s Interpretation:** - **Function as a Negative Constraint:** - Function limits what forms can be considered beautiful. - "One would be able to add much to a building that would be pleasing... if only it were not supposed to be a church." (Kant, [1790] 2001, 115) - **Implications:** - Function can hinder beauty, ruling out certain forms. - **Contrast with Modernism:** - Modernists believe functionality contributes to beauty. - Guyer’s view suggests function can get in the way of beauty. --- ### Dependent Beauty v.2 - **Wicks’s Interpretation:** - Function plays an active role in an object’s beauty. - **Contingency of Form:** - An object’s purpose doesn’t fully determine its form. - "The defined purpose of the object is an abstract concept... can therefore never fully determine every contingent detail of its concrete instantiation." - **Beauty Through Comparison:** - Beauty arises when we consider how the form realizes its function among possible alternatives. - "We appreciate... the contingency of the way the object realizes its purpose." - **Alignment with Modernism:** - The underdetermination of form by function enhances beauty. - Turns a problem into an advantage for Modernist aesthetics. --- ### Problems for Wicks - **Imaginative Comparison Issue:** - We don’t typically imagine alternative forms when appreciating design. - The "mental slideshow" isn’t part of our aesthetic experience. - **Universality Problem:** - If form is always contingent, then every design would be beautiful. - **Shift to Simplicity and Elegance:** - Beauty arises from designs being particularly simple or elegant given their function. - "We appreciate how a mathematical theorem is simple and elegant only with respect to other possible ways to complete the proof." (Wicks, 1997, 392) --- ## Functional Beauty --- ### Dependent Beauty and Walton’s Influence - **Functional beauty:** Aesthetic value arises from an object’s ability to fulfill its function well. - Could be thought of as another way to think about dependent beauty - **Kendall Walton’s Categories** help explain how different features contribute to functional beauty. --- ### Types of Functional Beauty - **Kendall Walton’s Categories:** Originally used to analyze features in art objects - **Standard features:** Essential features that define the art category - _Example:_ Landscape painting having a horizon - **Contra-standard features:** - Unexpected features that challenge the norm - _Example:_ Landscape painting without a sky - **Variable features:** - Non-essential features that vary without altering the core identity of the artwork - _Example:_ Color palette --- ### Types of Functional Beauty (Applied to Design) - **Kendall Walton’s Categories:** Objects belong to functional categories with expectations - **Standard features:** Essential features that define the category of an object - _Example:_ Chair having legs - **Contra-standard features:** Unexpected features that challenge the norm - _Example:_ Chair without a backrest - **Variable features:** Non-essential features that vary without altering the object’s core identity - _Example:_ Color of a chair --- ### Types of Functional Beauty (Continued) - **Looking Fit:** - Object appears well-suited to its purpose, displaying features indicative of high functionality. - **Elegance and Simplicity:** - Form effectively serves function without excess, often through minimal variable features. - **Pleasing Visual Tension:** - Unexpected, contra-standard features challenge norms while maintaining functionality. --- ### Types of Functional Beauty (Detailed) - **Looking Fit:** - Achieved through standard and variable features that indicate high functionality, and the absence of contra-standard features. - **Elegance and Simplicity:** - Linked to minimal variable features, enhancing appearance without altering core function, creating an aesthetically pleasing and efficient form. - **Visual Tension:** - Achieved through contra-standard features that challenge norms while maintaining the object’s function, creating aesthetic tension. --- ### Modernist Ideals and Simplicity - Functional beauty isn’t just simplicity or economy - Diversity of relationships between form and function - Walton’s categories help illustrate how different features contribute uniquely to the perception of beauty in functional design. --- ## Taste --- ### Objective vs. Subjective Taste - **Subjective View:** No objective truths about beauty - **Curt Ducasse:** Beauty judgments reflect personal pleasure, immune to rational dispute - **Objective View:** Some judgments are better - **David Hume:** True judges with delicacy, experience, freedom from prejudice - **True beauty:** "Naturally fitted to give pleasure" --- ### The Value of Good Taste - **True Judge:** Sensitive to beauty but hyper-aware of flaws - **Skeptical View:** Bad taste may lead to more pleasure - Enjoy a broader variety of objects without criticism - **Higher Quality of Pleasure:** True beauty provides a superior form of pleasure --- # Speaker Notes ## Admin ### Slide 1: Rearranging Classes - **Opening Remarks:** - Welcome everyone to today's session. Before we dive into our main topic, I have a few administrative announcements. - **Rearranging Classes:** - Due to scheduling conflicts and to accommodate everyone's availability, we'll be rearranging some of our upcoming classes. - **Action Required:** - Please check your emails for the updated schedule. - Let me know if you have any conflicts with the new dates so we can make necessary adjustments. - **Emphasize Communication:** - Open communication is key. If you have any concerns or issues, feel free to reach out after class or during my office hours. ## Today ### Slide 2: A New Topic, the Aesthetics of Design - **Introduction to the New Topic:** - Today, we embark on a new journey exploring the **Aesthetics of Design**. - This topic bridges the gap between functionality and beauty in technological artifacts. - **Relevance:** - Understanding aesthetics in design is crucial for grasping how technology influences and is influenced by human values and perceptions. - **Key Questions:** - How does functionality relate to beauty? - Can purely functional design lead to aesthetic satisfaction? - What philosophical debates surround the aesthetics of technology? ## Form, Function, Beauty ### Slide 3: Modernism: Function Dictates Form - **Modernist Philosophy:** - The Modernist movement posits that **function should dictate form** in design. - The famous slogan: **"Form follows Function"** encapsulates this idea. - **Functionality Leads to Beauty:** - Modernists believe that when an object is designed purely based on its functional requirements, it inherently becomes beautiful. - **Design Derives from Functional Elements:** - A design should emerge from the object's purpose without added decoration or stylistic elements. - **Aesthetically Satisfying Functional Design:** - The goal is to achieve aesthetic satisfaction through simplicity and utility. ### Slide 4: Underdetermination of Form - **Critique of Modernism:** - **David Pye** challenges the notion that function alone determines form. - **Underdetermination:** The idea that a single function can be realized by multiple forms. - **Pye's Argument:** - "The shape of it is in no way imposed on the designer." - Designers have significant freedom in choosing the form, even when the function is fixed. - **Example - Ceilings:** - Ceilings are typically flat, but functionally, they could be any shape and still serve their purpose. - **Historical Context:** - The "Machine Aesthetic" from early Modernism worked well for some objects but not others. - **Penny Sparke's Observation:** - Objects like chairs reveal their functional components, aligning with Modernist principles. - However, items like radios conceal their inner workings, challenging the idea that function dictates form. ### Slide 5: Rebuttal - **Modernist Counterarguments:** - Modernists emphasize the importance of user interaction and the user interface in design. - **Function Includes Usability:** - Functionality isn't just about internal components but also about how users engage with the object. - **Outer Shell's Functional Purpose:** - The design of an object's exterior can enhance usability and user experience. - Example: A radio's interface is designed for ease of use, which is a functional consideration. ### Slide 6: Function and Aesthetic Value - **Bridging Function and Beauty:** - The connection between an object's function and its aesthetic appeal is complex. - **Key Question:** - How does the functionality of an object contribute to or detract from its beauty? - **Modernist Perspective:** - By focusing on function, designers can achieve an inherent beauty without additional decoration. ### Slide 7: Beauty - **Two Notions of Beauty:** 1. **Indefinable Beauty:** - Beauty is mysterious and subjective. - It's a personal preference or an ineffable quality that can't be fully articulated. 2. **Specific Characteristics:** - Beauty can be defined through quantifiable attributes, such as the "golden ratio." - This approach attempts to measure beauty through specific, observable features. - **Limitations:** - Defining beauty strictly through measurable attributes fails to encompass all aspects of what is considered beautiful. - Beauty often transcends quantifiable metrics. ### Slide 8: The Aesthetic Attitude: Disinterestedness - **Jerome Stolnitz's Theory:** - Proposed that aesthetic appreciation requires **disinterestedness**. - This means appreciating an object without any personal interest or practical concerns influencing one's perception. - **Application to Design Objects:** - It's challenging to adopt a disinterested attitude toward design objects because they are inherently practical and functional. - **George Dickie's Argument:** - Practical and aesthetic attitudes can coexist. - One can appreciate the aesthetic qualities of a design object while also considering its functionality. - **Implication:** - Supports the idea that design aesthetics can be appreciated within their functional context. ### Slide 9: Alternative Views - **Aesthetic Experience (Monroe Beardsley):** - Defined aesthetic experience as one that is intense, unified, and complex. - **Limitation:** - This definition struggles to include mundane design objects that we encounter daily. - **Aesthetic Realism:** - Suggests that aesthetic properties (e.g., elegance) emerge from perceptual properties (e.g., shape, color). - **Emergence:** - Beauty isn't an added component but emerges naturally from the design itself. - **Relevance to Design:** - Supports the idea that aesthetic qualities are inherent in design objects due to their perceptual properties. ## Kant! ### Slide 10: Kant’s Distinction: Free vs. Dependent Beauty - **Immanuel Kant's Contribution:** - Distinguished between **Free Beauty** and **Dependent Beauty**. - **Free Beauty:** - Appreciated without any concept of what the object ought to be. - Examples: Abstract art, natural phenomena. - Quote: “Presupposes no concept of what the object ought to be.” - **Dependent Beauty:** - Involves recognizing the object's function or purpose. - The beauty of an object is tied to understanding its intended use. - Quote: “Does presuppose such a concept and the perfection of the object in accordance with it.” - **Application to Design:** - Design objects often fall under dependent beauty because their aesthetic appreciation involves understanding their function. ### Slide 11: Dependent Beauty v.1 (Paul Guyer’s Interpretation) - **Function as a Negative Constraint:** - **Paul Guyer** interprets Kant's dependent beauty as function limiting what forms can be considered beautiful. - **Key Point:** - Function can hinder beauty by ruling out certain forms that don't align with the object's purpose. - **Kant's Example:** - “One would be able to add much to a building that would be pleasing... if only it were not supposed to be a church.” - **Implications:** - Function serves as a constraint, potentially conflicting with aesthetic choices. - **Contrast with Modernism:** - Modernists believe functionality contributes to beauty. - Guyer's view suggests that function can get in the way of beauty, challenging the Modernist perspective. ### Slide 12: Dependent Beauty v.2 (Robert Wicks’s Interpretation) - **Function Plays an Active Role:** - **Robert Wicks** argues that function actively contributes to an object's beauty. - **Contingency of Form:** - An object's purpose doesn't fully determine its form. - There are multiple ways to realize a function, making form contingent. - Quote: "The defined purpose of the object is an abstract concept... can therefore never fully determine every contingent detail of its concrete instantiation." - **Beauty Through Comparison:** - Beauty arises when we consider how the form realizes its function among possible alternatives. - Quote: "We appreciate... the contingency of the way the object realizes its purpose." - **Alignment with Modernism:** - Wicks's view turns the underdetermination of form by function into an advantage, supporting the Modernist claim that functionality enhances beauty. ### Slide 13: Problems for Wicks - **Imaginative Comparison Issue:** - Wicks's theory relies on the idea that we imagine alternative forms when appreciating design. - **Critique:** - In practice, we don't typically engage in a "mental slideshow" of possible forms during aesthetic appreciation. - **Universality Problem:** - If form is always contingent, then, by Wicks's logic, every design would be considered beautiful. - This dilutes the meaningfulness of aesthetic judgment. - **Shift to Simplicity and Elegance:** - To address these issues, the focus shifts to appreciating designs that are particularly simple or elegant given their function. - Wicks's Example: - "We appreciate how a mathematical theorem is simple and elegant only with respect to other possible ways to complete the proof." - **Implication:** - Beauty arises not just from contingency but from how effectively and elegantly a design fulfills its function. ## Functional Beauty ### Slide 14: Dependent Beauty and Walton’s Influence - **Functional Beauty Defined:** - Aesthetic value arises from an object's ability to fulfill its function well. - This can be seen as another way to interpret dependent beauty. - **Kendall Walton’s Categories:** - Provides a framework to explain how different features contribute to functional beauty. - Originally used to analyze features in art objects but applicable to design. ### Slide 15: Types of Functional Beauty (Introduction) - **Walton's Categories Applied to Design:** - **Standard Features:** - Essential features that define a category of objects. - Example: A chair having legs. - **Contra-standard Features:** - Unexpected features that challenge the norm. - Example: A chair without a backrest. - **Variable Features:** - Non-essential features that vary without altering the object's core identity. - Example: The color of a chair. - **Purpose of Categories:** - Helps us understand our expectations and how deviations from them affect our aesthetic judgments. ### Slide 16: Types of Functional Beauty (Detailed) - **Looking Fit:** - An object appears well-suited to its purpose. - Achieved through standard and variable features that indicate high functionality and the absence of contra-standard features. - **Example:** - A well-designed hammer looks sturdy and capable of driving nails effectively. - **Elegance and Simplicity:** - The design serves its function without unnecessary elements. - Linked to minimal variable features that enhance appearance without altering core function. - **Example:** - A minimalist smartphone design that is both functional and aesthetically pleasing. - **Pleasing Visual Tension:** - Incorporates contra-standard features that challenge norms while maintaining functionality. - Creates a dynamic and intriguing aesthetic. - **Example:** - A staircase with an unconventional spiral design that is still safe and functional. ### Slide 17: Modernist Ideals and Simplicity - **Functional Beauty Beyond Simplicity:** - While simplicity and economy are valued, functional beauty encompasses a diversity of relationships between form and function. - **Walton’s Contribution:** - His categories illustrate how different features contribute uniquely to the perception of beauty in functional design. - **Modernist Alignment:** - The Modernist ideal appreciates designs where functionality leads to simplicity and elegance but acknowledges other forms of aesthetic expression. ## Taste ### Slide 18: Objective vs. Subjective Taste - **Subjective View:** - Argues that there are no objective truths about beauty. - **Curt Ducasse's Position:** - Beauty judgments reflect personal pleasure and are immune to rational dispute. - Suggests that aesthetic preferences are purely individual. - **Objective View:** - Maintains that some judgments are better or more valid than others. - **David Hume's Perspective:** - Introduces the concept of "true judges" who possess delicacy, experience, and freedom from prejudice. - **True Beauty:** - "Naturally fitted to give pleasure." - Implies that certain aesthetic qualities can be universally appreciated under the right conditions. ### Slide 19: The Value of Good Taste - **True Judge Characteristics:** - Sensitive to beauty and highly aware of flaws. - Their judgments are informed by experience and critical analysis. - **Skeptical View:** - Suggests that having "bad taste" may lead to more pleasure because one enjoys a broader variety of objects without critical scrutiny. - **Higher Quality of Pleasure:** - True beauty provides a superior form of pleasure that is more fulfilling. - The depth of appreciation in good taste outweighs the breadth of enjoyment in bad taste. - **Implication for Design:** - Encourages striving for good taste to achieve a higher aesthetic standard in design. ## Conclusion ### Slide 20: Conclusion - **Modernist Claim Revisited:** - The assertion that beauty arises from functionality is complex due to the underdetermination of form by function. - **Different Philosophical Approaches:** - We've explored various theories, including: - Aesthetic attitude theory. - Aesthetic realism. - Dependent beauty. - Functional beauty. - **Key Questions:** - Is functional beauty alone sufficient for design? - Should designers and consumers strive for good taste? - How do we balance functionality with aesthetic value in creating meaningful designs? - **Final Thoughts:** - The relationship between form, function, and beauty is multifaceted. - Understanding the philosophical underpinnings can enhance our appreciation and practice of design. - Encourages ongoing dialogue and exploration of these concepts in both theoretical and practical contexts. ## Function, Form, and Aesthetics ### Can Form Follow Function? This presentation explores the complex relationship between an object's practical function and its aesthetic form or beauty. It dives into some key debates in design theory about whether beauty emerges from pure functionality, or if form and function are more independent. The core question we'll wrestle with is: does an object's function determine its form? The Modernist view, which we'll unpack first, answers a resounding "yes" - it sees beauty as emerging organically when the designer pursues functionality above all else. We'll examine this view and then see how later thinkers challenge and complicate it. Through this investigation, we'll touch on deep issues in philosophical aesthetics, like how to define beauty, whether taste is purely subjective, and if some aesthetic pleasures are more valuable than others. The relationship between form and function turns out to be a fascinating lens for exploring enduring questions about art, objects, and experience. ### Modernist View vs Reality - Modernist view: beauty emerges from purely functional design - Pursue functionality, get beauty for free - But does function really determine form? The Modernist view in design held that beauty arises organically from pure functionality. The idea was that the designer's job is simply to make the object work as well as possible for its intended use - and if they do that, beauty will follow naturally, "for free." No need to separately consider aesthetics or ornamentation. This echoes the famous Modernist slogan, "form follows function," coined by American architect Louis Sullivan. The implication is that function dictates or necessitates form - that each object has an ideal form perfectly suited to its function, and the designer's job is just to uncover it. But over time, this influential view came under scrutiny. Later theorists began to question whether function really determines form in such a straightforward way. They argued that even after accounting for functional constraints, there are usually many forms that could realize a given function. If so, then the designer still has crucial aesthetic choices to make - choices that function alone doesn't dictate. ### Pye's Critique - Function underdetermines form - "When any useful thing is designed, the shape of it is in no way imposed on the designer, or determined by any influence outside him, or entailed" - Wide scope of choice in realizing function - E.g. ceilings flat but don't need to be to perform function One key critic of the Modernist view was David Pye, a British furniture designer and design theorist. Pye argued strongly that function does not determine form. Instead, he thought function greatly underdetermines form: for any given functional goal, there are many different forms that could achieve it equally well. Pye put the point bluntly, saying "When any useful thing is designed, the shape of it is in no way imposed on the designer, or determined by any influence outside him, or entailed". In other words, no matter what type of object the designer is creating, its ultimate form is not necessitated by its function - the designer always has a wide scope of choice in how to realize that function physically. Consider the ceiling example Pye gives. Ceilings are uniformly flat, but there's no functional necessity for them to be - you could imagine a corrugated or vaulted ceiling doing the job just as well. And yet we make them flat anyway. Why? Pye says flatness is conventional, not functionally necessary. ### Form Constraints - Limitations on form "arise only in small part from the physical nature of the world, but in a very large measure from considerations of economy and choice" - Pye - Function alone can't dictate form So if not function, what does constrain the form of objects? What stops designers from making ceilings corrugated or chairs always beanbag-shaped? Pye offers a clear answer: "Limitations on form arise only in small part from the physical nature of the world, but in a very large measure from considerations of economy and choice". In other words, what ends up constraining form are largely economic and conventional factors, not functional ones. Making a corrugated ceiling is more expensive and effortful than a flat one, so that's one reason flat is conventional. And we're used to chairs taking certain forms, so those are easier to produce and sell than unfamiliar ones would be. Inertia and cost end up confining most objects to a standard set of forms. ### Squaring Function and Aesthetic Value #### Defining Beauty - Defining beauty/aesthetic value is philosophically tricky - Subjective enjoyment or objective properties? - Special attitude or everyday experience? - Kant's attempt: free vs dependent beauty When it comes to aesthetic judgment and designed objects, we immediately run into some deep philosophical waters. After all, to decide if one form-function combination is more aesthetically valuable than another, we first need to get clear on what aesthetic value even is. What exactly makes an object beautiful or aesthetically good? ### Kant's Theory of Beauty #### Free Beauty - "presupposes no concept of what the object ought to be" - Not based on object's purpose or function #### Dependent Beauty - "does presuppose such a concept and the perfection of the object in accordance with it" - Depends on object's purpose or function ### Interpretations of Dependent Beauty Two interpretations: 1. Function as negative constraint (Guyer) - Can't find forms that conflict with function beautiful - "One would be able to add much to a building that would be pleasing in the intuition of it, if only it were not supposed to be a church" 2. Function enabling positive beauty (Wicks) - Contingency of form in realizing function allows for beauty ### Dependent Beauty in Detail #### Wicks' "internal" view of dependent beauty - Based on contingency of form in realizing function - Function alone doesn't dictate form - "appreciate the contingency of the way the object realizes its purpose" - Imagining other possible forms leads to sense of beauty ### Consequences of Wicks' View - Forsey: know/imagine function realized otherwise - Judge "against a backdrop of past attempts" - But is this "imaginative run through" really how we experience beauty? - If form always contingent on function, is everything beautiful? ### Worries About Wicks' Account - Ultimately relies on simplicity, elegance, economy of form - Not just bare contingency - Slides back into familiar Modernist idea - Rather than Kantian notion of dependent beauty - Still wrestling with how to positively connect form and function ### Functional Beauty #### Parsons & Carlson's Theory - Alternative to Wicks' dependent beauty - Draws on Kendall Walton's property categories - Standard: features expected for an object/category - Contra-standard: unexpected features - Variable: features unrelated to an object/category ### How Functional Beauty Works - Aesthetic properties emerge from interaction of: 1. Lower-order perceptual properties (color, shape, etc.) 2. Functional category of the object - Same properties will have different aesthetic effects for different categories ### Examples of Functional Beauty - Simplicity, elegance, inevitability - Standard or low-end variable features - Order, unity, correctness - Walton - Many standard features create stability - "Looking fit" - Lacks contra-standard, has variables evoking functionality ### Advantages of Functional Beauty - Allows richer form-function relations beyond mere simplicity - Contra-standard features enabling "visual tension" - Evocative variables suggesting functionality - Expands possibilities for aesthetic experience of functional objects - Still some worries: - Vague notions of "looking fit", "evoking function" - Subjective "expectations" vs. objective features ### Good Taste in Design Do some have better taste than others? - Hume: yes! "Standard of Taste" - Common disagreement, but some judgments clearly better - "True judges" have superior taste ### Five Key Traits of True Judges 1. "Delicacy of imagination" - perceive subtle details 2. "Practice" - experience evaluating many works 3. "Comparison" - wide exposure for comparative judgment 4. "Strong sense" - intelligence, reason 5. Absence of "prejudice" - impartial, unbiased ### The Standard of Taste - Agreement among true judges reveals objective principles - Based on "general principles of taste" rooted in human nature - Like seeing "true colors" while others are "color blind" - "Strong sense, united to delicate sentiment, improved by practice, perfected by comparison, and cleared of all prejudice" ### Why Care About Good Taste? - Hume: we naturally seek a Standard of Taste - "a rule, by which the various sentiments of men may be reconciled" - But skeptical concern: why not just enjoy what you enjoy? - True judges lose simple pleasures of mediocre works - Effort to gain discernment & risk less overall enjoyment ### Bad Taste Deeper worries about the value of good taste: - True judges lose pleasures of mediocre works - "Connoisseurship makes impossible the aesthetic pleasures which none but the aesthetically less sensitive souls can taste" - Ducasse - Judging is also effortful and unpleasant - "Flaws that pass by the unschooled give pain to the expert" ### Quantitative Argument for Bad Taste 1. Judges get less enjoyment from mediocre works 2. Most works are mediocre rather than great 3. So judges likely get less enjoyment overall 4. Becoming a judge takes a lot of effort - So why bother? Just enjoy what you enjoy! ### Mill's Response: Quality vs Quantity - Mill: pleasures differ in quality, not just quantity - "It would be absurd that while, in estimating all other things, quality is considered as well as quantity, the estimation of pleasures should be supposed to depend on quantity alone" - Higher pleasures of true judges are more valuable - "Better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied" ### Applying Mill's Test to Taste - True judges wouldn't trade higher pleasures for any amount of lower ones - Even if it meant less pleasure overall - Suggests their pleasures are of a higher quality, not just higher quantity - So developing good taste may be worth it to access more valuable aesthetic experiences ### Conclusions and Lingering Questions - We intuitively value good taste and strive to develop it - Suggests there's truth to Mill's idea of higher quality pleasures - But tension remains between subjective enjoyment and objective standards - Can we really compare pleasures qualitatively? - Does extra effort of judgment undermine overall value? - No easy answers, but wrestling with these issues is central to aesthetics and design