← Back to the axis

Relation to the world· Aesthetics

Elitism of taste

Axis: Hierarchy of tastesAre some aesthetic pleasures higher than others, or is every hierarchy of taste a social construction?

Not all tastes are equal: qualified judges, trained and sensitive, recognize true beauty, and some pleasures are qualitatively higher than others. Kitsch and refinement are not on the same level.

Who holds this position

Movements 1

Show inferred positions (1)
Platonisminferable

Owing to objective beauty and the hierarchy of goods, Platonism implies a hierarchy of taste: not all pleasures and objects are of equal worth, and the pleasures of the intellect, ordered to the true and the beautiful, are objectively superior to those of the body. The gradation follows the ladder leading from the sensible to the intelligible.

Plato, Philebus, 51a-53c, the hierarchy of pleasures · Plato, Republic, 580d-587a, pleasures compared

Philosophers 3

Platoexplicit

There is an objective hierarchy of pleasures and of the soul's objects: in the , only the philosopher, who has tasted all three kinds of pleasure, can judge which are truest, and his verdict ranks the pleasures of knowledge highest. Pleasures are not of equal worth, and competence to rank them belongs only to the well-ordered soul.

Republic, IX, 580d-583a · Philebus, 51a-53c

Millexplicit

Distinguishing higher pleasures raises a difficulty: by what measure does one rank a quality that, by definition, does not reduce to quantity? Mill's original answer is an empirical criterion: the only judge is comparative experience, the settled preference of those who have known both orders of pleasure alike, the competent judges. Their verdict leans toward the pleasures of the mind, even at the cost of a lesser contentment. The resulting is therefore no matter of birth or class but of cultivation and experience, in principle open to all.

Utilitarianism, ch. 2 (the verdict of the competent judges)

Show inferred positions (1)
Schopenhauerinferable

The perceives, in the very same thing, what the ordinary man, wholly given over to willing and to use, will never see: there are highly unequal degrees in the capacity to contemplate. The pleasures of the mind sharply rank men, and the 'philistine' is defined by his incapacity to enjoy without interest.

Parerga and Paralipomena, 'Aphorisms on the Wisdom of Life'

Foundations and implications
↑ What grounds itElitism of taste — Hierarchy of tastes=Elitism of tasteHierarchy of tastes
Descriptive
Objective beauty — Beauty=Objective beautyBeauty
Descriptive
Realism about universals — Universals=Realism aboutuniversalsUniversals
Descriptive
A leaf — an application that grounds nothing further here.

What grounds it

Beauty

If some things are beautiful in themselves, then not all judgments of taste are equal: some are more correct, and educating one's eye lets one better perceive what is truly beautiful. Objective beauty supports a hierarchy of taste, where the trained eye of the connoisseur has authority over mere whim.

What it implies

A leaf — an application that grounds nothing further here.