Analysis of Hume and Wartenberg's Antimony

When it comes to the judgment of an art object, who has the correct answer or the incorrect answer? Does the normal average person have a better understanding of art, even though this person has not experienced art? Or on the other hand does an accomplished artist who possesses the skill such of Renoir or Monet have a better understanding of what art truly is? The answers through these questions may never have an absolute (true) answer (definition) but through “Art As Object of Taste”, David Hume’s antimony states that two central beliefs claim to be the rubric for assessing the goodness of art. For example Hume believes that most people think that it is possible to make critical judgments about the quality of art objects. An instance that would portray this situation, would to compare Norman Rockwell and Leonardo DaVinci’s art objects, and conclude that DaVinci’s artworks are better due to he is more of a renowned artist than Norman Rockwell is. This argument could go both ways because how do we truly know that DaVinci is more of a superior artist than Norman Rockwell, or vice versa? This is more of personal opinion because again who can admit that DaVinci is truly superior. It is true that the Mona Lisa by DaVinci is one of the most recognized and appreciated paintings of all time but can we truly judge one artist by one masterpiece? On the other hand Norman Rockwell has been extremely popular with the American culture since the early 20th century in which many of his art objects have been posted in numerous art museums, calendars, and strangely in restaurant bathrooms, which I have experienced. Again this argument is double sided because this is an answer of taste in which depends solely on the personality of an individual. Now the second side to Hume’s antimony results from a consideration of what grounds these judgments, asserting that taste determines whether an art object affects the manifestation of multiple emotions or “sentiments” which Hume relates to. Truly an individuals’ taste can affect the outcome of judging an “art object”, adding a significant amount of bias to the outcome. Previously when relating Rockwell and DaVinci, the reason why an individual would conclude that any painting of DaVinci is superior in relation to Rockwell is due to taste. For an example I can say that out of the science, Physics is completely boring but the knowledge that anyone acquires from this subject is practical, and can be used in daily applications. However another person can proclaim that Physics is entertaining but the information is completely useless in daily applications. Who possesses the correct answer, myself or the other individual? Is there any type of rubric to distinguish whether an individual is correct or are they lying? Truly we may never know the answer to “exclusive” based questions because does any answer even exist?