Talk:Aesthetic taste

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Aesthetics

Sociology

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Failed vote for deletion can be found at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Bad taste

aesthetics[edit]

This article is about aesthetics. Taste is a sense like on the tongue. Please redirect this to there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.184.76 (talk) 21:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

erm?[edit]

It has been proven the Webb Baird has good taste. That is a fact.

To be deleted I guess?

Removed this link to an external humor site [1] - Writtenonsand 22:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Critique of Good Taste[edit]

A critique of Good Taste in the British context can be found on [2]

Removed[edit]

I removed:

Paul Graham notes, "I think it's easier to see ugliness than to imagine beauty. The recipe for great work is: very exacting taste."

because I do not see a worldwide perspective, is Paul Graham important in the field of aesthetics? --Jahsonic 08:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move[edit]

An admin to move the article to Taste (aesthetics), please. Taste is about aesthetics (not in the sens of « the branch of philosophy »). Sociology is only one of the few disciplines of research on that subject : philosophy, history, cultural studies, psychology...

--Ironie (talk) 01:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC) the french aesthetician of fr:[reply]

Absolutely agree.Greg Bard (talk) 03:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Science of Taste[edit]

Though 'taste' in the sense discussed here is largely cultural it's based on some common human characteristics. Eg we generally find symmetrical faces more attractive than asymmetric faces. Or take the sensation of bitterness. Bitterness (unlike saltiness) is not a chemical term - many different chemicals taste bitter. The bitter taste is an alarm signal telling us to reject the thing on our tongue as it's probably toxic.

In the more subtle area of art E O Wilson and V Ramachandran have proposed partial theories of aesthetics that ought to be given space here.

Complete rewrite[edit]

A group of graduate student sociologists from the University of Jyväskylä made it a project to completely rewrite this article. I think it's at least a bit better referenced etc now. The section Bad Taste had to be left alone, since we didn't really have any material for it. Jokinen | Talk 11:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What Does This Mean?[edit]

"An understanding of taste as something that is expressed in actions between people helps to perceive many social phenomena, like fashion, that would otherwise be inconceivable."

Helps whom to perceive? Perceivable=conceivable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.242.214.207 (talk) 16:32, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Helps anyone to understand. I agree that the phrasing could be better.

“

to perceive (third-person singular simple present perceives, present participle perceiving, simple past and past participle perceived)

To see, to be aware of, to understand.

”

(wiktionary, emph. mine) Jokinen | Talk 06:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Aesthetic judgement[edit]

I'm chiming in to let you know that Aesthetic judgement, an article I came across in new page patrol appears to have a very similar scope to this article, while still containing some distinct content that should be merged. I'd like to encourage you to join the conversation there. Never mind, copyvios were found on the other article _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:15, 24 October 2018 (UTC)01:35, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FRINGE POV being pushed on this article[edit]

this article is certainly well-written, but you can compare any of the IEP articles on aesthetics and see that the point of view being pushed on this article bears little resemblance to any academic study of taste. This article instead seems to focus primarily on... class struggle? And barely tries to hide its clear dislike for Immanuel Kant, a viewpoint that it does not appear to share with other articles on the subject elsewhere. It maybe be best to remove all of the material from the 2009 rewrite, which was clearly not done with WP:NPOV in mind. - car chasm (talk) 05:41, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've stubbed the article, I believe that the IEP is a much better model for expanding it in the future than what was there before. - car chasm (talk) 05:52, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]