Is There Really No Accounting for Taste?

We live in a complicated world where our aesthetic preferences may have ethical consequences. For example, your neighbour might prefer to keep a vibrant green lawn throughout the summer, but gardening with plants native to your area and using less water is surely better, all else being equal. Or maybe you really like the taste of this rare delicacy — which happens to be the meat of an endangered turtle.

We might also think that some aesthetic preferences reveal something about the kind of person one is: if someone is only interested in dressing in designer outfits, they might be superficial and shallow. A friend who enjoys crass comedies could also be a vulgar person. These assessments of character all relate aesthetic preferences to moral character.

We also know our aesthetic preferences can change, at least in some instances. A lot of us now like different kinds of food than we did several years ago, and people frequently take classes to learn to appreciate modern art or classical music or hip hop. Given that our preferences might sometimes be morally charged, and we can, at least in some cases, change our preferences, do we have an ethical responsibility to examine and maybe try to change what we like?

Deliberately seeking to cultivate or broaden our tastes might make us better people. We often talk about cultivating open-mindedness, for example, because it is a generally positive trait. We could also try to change our preferences in order to develop authenticity. Many of our aesthetic preferences are inherited and reflect the prevailing impressions and injustices dominant in our society, including views about what makes a person attractive. Beauty companies contribute to these social standards and may exploit resulting insecurities for commercial interests. In such cases, it may be liberating to think about why we find certain things aesthetically pleasing, and potentially cultivating different aesthetic preferences. Even when we cannot easily change our tastes, should we nonetheless try to encourage some tastes while we discourage others as we develop our own preferences?

There are many reasons to think we are generally not responsible for our desires and preferences. We do not usually experience our own tastes as choices. Judging someone on the basis of preferences can also be dangerous. Negative characterizations of others rooted in criticism of differences in taste have often been used to justify prejudice based on class, gender identity or expression, race, and sexual orientation.

How do we navigate our aesthetic preferences when there might be ethical obstacles or consequences to what we like? Is there really no arguing over matters of taste? What, if any, standards can we apply to others and ourselves when making such judgments?

Discussion Questions

Further Reading

• “Review: Everyday Aesthetics” by Tom Leddy (2009)
• “The Invalidation of the Interests of Teenage Girls and Young Women” by Anushka Mankodi (2021)
• “Judgement of People’s Moral Behaviour Varies With Their Wealth, Social Status: Study” by Randy Shore (2016)

Bibliography

Erkli, Cem. 2023. “Case 4: Is There Really No Accounting For Taste?.” In Ethics Bowl Canada 2023-2024 Regional Case Set, edited by Ethics Bowl Canada Case Development Committee. n.p.: Ethics Bowl Canada. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mY2bsD2RqhrVnPrLWO_RZxvgZ-X2ddIS/view.

Leddy, Tom. 2009. “Review: Everyday Aesthetics.” Review of Everyday Aesthetics, by Yuriko Saito. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, February 15, 2009. https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/everyday-aesthetics/

Mankodi, Anushka. 2021. “The Invalidation of the Interests of Teenage Girls and Young Women.” The Teen Magazine, January 31, 2021. https://www.theteenmagazine.com/the-invalidation-of-the-interests-of-teenage-girls-and-young-women

Shore, Randy. 2016. “Judgement of People’s Moral Behaviour Varies With Their Wealth, Social Status: Study.” Vancouver Sun, March 7, 2016. https://vancouversun.com/news/metro/judgment-of-peoples-moral-behaviour-varies-with-their-wealth-social-status-study

Attribution

Unless otherwise noted, “Is There Really No Accounting For Taste?” by Cem Erkli (2023) [and the Ethics Bowl Canada Case Development Committee], via Ethics Bowl Canada, is used and adapted under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

The Ethics Bowl Canada Case Development committee gives permission to third parties to use the Case Sets it has developed between September 2021 and March 2024 under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. The Committee also asks that users notify Ethics Bowl Canada of their use of the case sets, especially if they are adapting or remixing it. This can be done by sending an email to contact@ethicsbowl.ca.