Final answer:
David Hume did not categorically reject art that expresses immoral attitudes or vicious manners, as his philosophy emphasized the subjectivity of moral judgments and aesthetic taste. The correct option is 1.
Step-by-step explanation:
David Hume, an Enlightenment philosopher, countered the notion of deriving morality solely from facts, asserting that morality is linked to sentiments. Hume's views on art and morality leaned towards the belief that moral judgments stem from personal sentiments and are not factual.
In his essay "Of the Standard of Taste," Hume acknowledged the subjectivity of taste and aesthetic judgment, suggesting that while tastes can vary greatly, those of educated and refined critics should carry more weight in determining the value of art. However, he did not claim that good art cannot express immoral attitudes, as that would contradict his view of the subjectivity of taste.
Instead, he recognized that debates on taste often lead to passionate discussions and that beauty is a subjective judgment. In summary, Hume believed that while taste is personal, it can be improved through education and experience, allowing refined critics to offer more authoritative judgments on art.
Thus, in relation to Cynthia Freeland's interpretation, it's most likely that David Hume did not believe that good art cannot express immoral attitudes or vicious manners. Instead, Hume's skepticism and belief in the subjectivity of taste imply that he would reject a universal condemnation of art based on perceived immorality, seeing such judgments as grounded in personal sentiment rather than objective truth. Hence, 1 is the correct option.