Hume views on how to define art

Hume within his work “Art as Object of Taste” is not trying to create a definition, but is trying to see if one can find a set of objective standards in which one can use in order to criticize how good a work of art truly is.  He presents an antinomy, an antinomy is defined as a pair of ideas, each with a claim on truth but seemingly mutually irreconcilable. He states that the first idea of this antinomy is that people claim that they can make critical judgments about the quality of a work of art, while the other idea within this antinomy is that it is merely taste that can decide whether a work of art affects one’s “sentiments”.  He states that there can be no objective standards when judging a work of art, he also says that there are certain features within works of art that please all human beings. Since there are certain features that make a work of art pleasurable for all human beings therefore there will be a sort of universal agreement that a work of art would be more beautiful than another. Hume makes it known although there is universal agreement on some works of art, there is bound to be disagreement on how aesthetically pleasing a work of art can be. He accounts for these people who disagree as people who have a sort of psychological impairment that inhibits them from being able to adequately place judgments on a work of art. For example he says that one must ignore those who are influenced by their culture, being self absorbed, being in a state of intoxication, being sick, or even being young and in love.  He believes these things are “distractions” that do not allow people to create good judgments on about art. In order for someone to be able to pass a good judgment on art they must be clear of all distractions.