Among the main contributors to the aesthetic sense theory to be discussed here (the moral sense theory will be discussed later), are Shaftesbruy, Hutcheson, Herbert and Ruskin. According to Shaftesbury, what is beautiful and true is agreeable and good. Similarly Ruskin said, “Tell me what you like and I will tell you what you are.”
Image Source: upload.wikimedia.org
Herbert also looks upon beauty and good as identical, and Hutcheson too talks of the beauty or ugliness of actions. In this way, according to all these philosophers, conscience is an aesthetic sense which immediately discerns the beauty or ugliness of actions. Treating the aesthetic sense as insufficient, Shaftesbury and Hutcheson look upon man’s social tendency as the cause or morality and the aesthetic sense as beneficial to the maximum number.
Criticisms of Aesthetic Sense Theory:
Following criticisms have been advanced against Aesthetic sense theory:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(1) Difference in the natures of moral consciousness and aesthetic intuition:
There is obligation hi moral consciousness and merely a feeling of admiration in aesthetic intuition. Morality may not be agreeable but aesthetic intuition always is. In this way the natures of moral consciousness and aesthetic intuition differ and the two cannot be treated as identical.
(2) Moral laws are permanent intuitions cluing able:
Morality cannot be based on aesthetic intuition or any other intuition because intuitions are prone to change while moral judgments are objective, everlasting, unqualified and valid.
(3) Standard of beauty is changeable, that of morality universal:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The standard of beauty confirms to time and place, and is consequently changeable and inadequate as the basis for any everlasting moral theory. Actually, morality is objective and aesthetic intuition subjective. Thus, the two are different
(4) Beauty and good are not one:
It is by no means essential that whatever is beautiful be good too. Sometimes even a beautiful person is characterless. Some things are extremely base from the moral viewpoint hi spite of their incontestable superiority front the aesthetic viewpoint Thus beauty cannot be accepted as invariably good.
(5) Aesthetic sense does not interpret the change of thought or transformation of character:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Judgments originating in the aesthetic sense are intuitive, having no place for argument. But, on the other hand, moral judgments can change upon a second thinking because they are based on thought.
(6) Morality is more comprehensive than aesthetic intuition:
The lack of an aesthetic sense does not bring about the degradation in the person consequent upon the absence of moral qualities. Aesthetic sense is completely lacking in many of the qualities of morality.
In morality there is obligation and derision and, as well as a consciousness of good and evil. According to Price, “The estimate of duty cannot be reduced to mere relish.” In the words of Rashdall,
Aesthetic judgments do seem to be more intimately connected with, and inseparable from sensation which presupposes a particular physiological organization than the most fundamental moral judgments.””
(7) Aesthetic sense is related to beauty and morality to spiritual welfare:
Aesthetic intuition is related to particular type of beauty but moral consciousness is concerned with spiritual welfare thus, when aesthetic intuition and moral consciousness conflict, it is the latter which should get importance.
An act, right from the aesthetic viewpoint and wrong from the moral, satisfies a small part of you and is handfed to the major part, consequently moral judgments are superior judgments upon subjects of aesthetic interest Morality is higher than art. In the merest of society, the aesthetic sense should be sacrificed in favour of morality.
In this way, discussing the values of assumptions regarding conscience we come to the conclusion that the conscience cannot be credited as the unqualified standard for moral judgment.
But if the conscience be treated as the voice of the entire self, it can render some necessary defectives hi a moral life. This self will be the self of die individual, but the universal soul which is present in every one.
The essence of this soul is reason because reason is the universal element in thus, judgments based on it will also be universal. It was this meaning “”Plied in Kant’s contention that the conscience is free from delusions.
Taking conscience in this form, it can actually become the voice of the soul giving true dears in moral life. But logical reasoning will make it clear that it is actually necessary for the conscience to evaluate the present act in the light of the ultimate good to arrive at a moral judgment
The conscience, however, has no levity for thought Thus, with people of a developed character the conscience can do the guiding in ordinary matters but in Pore complex moral situations, rational judgments are indispensable.
An Independent moral judgment is passed after consideration of good and bad. The conscience does have importance in moral life hi the form of foresight and Prudence of disciplined people but it is necessary to keep the rational element upon its decisions.