3 ms·
not the parent poster but I think I agree with your perspective here. The alternative is that some individuals' taste or sense of aesthetics is somehow innate a
by etrautmann 2y ago
not the parent poster but I think I agree with your perspective here. The alternative is that some individuals' taste or sense of aesthetics is somehow innate and unmoored from the statistics of the things they experience. There may be something to this, but for most practical purposes I would agree with your point.
- tikhonj 2y agoAnother alternative is that taste is something you can only learn through experience and mentorship, where memorizing simple rules and heuristics is not sufficient. Taste is an example of tacit knowledge[1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacit_knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacit_knowledge
- shw1n 2y agoPerhaps this is where I disagree -- I believe while difficult, all tacit knowledge can be made explicit, but is just hard to do so This may be because I'm not good at picking up on social cues, so had to learn things more consciously But ofc I could also be wrong and maybe there are things the subconscious can learn that the conscious cannot
- etrautmann 2y agoThere’s another argument though that some taste is genetically programmed, like our affinity for campfires or sweeping views. Those don’t seem to be learned as they seem to be entirely cross cultural and innate. Those aren’t examples of art of course but make the point that some sense of aesthetics may not be learned.