Agamben calls taste an “additional sense” that began to be recognized by writers in the 17-18th centuries. Not food taste. Was it really something that was recently evolved? He refers to it as “another knowledge”. You’d be surprised how taboo this is, I’ve looked for a book like this a few times and just happened to find this when looking up this meatball. It’s a taboo way of knowing in a democratic time. Similar to Alfarabi’s idea of happiness I talked about, people tend to be not very far away from taste in the food sense. It is a faculty that has evolved in only a minority of the population. Do you just feel like some kind of beast when you visit this site sometimes? People had it before the 17-18th centuries, they just didn’t realize they had it until then. Someone must have had the realization “What is that anyway?” Or who knows, maybe people were talking about it and not writing it down before then, if times were anything like today where hostility can be the expected reaction when one formulates ideas about these things. There’s no taste beyond food, don’t worry, now you can be happy with yourself. Now that I think of it, their tastelessness probably extends to food too. The main manifestation has to be taste as it relates to tolerance of personalities. They can really surround themselves with the least daring, least imaginative individuals and be content with that. They hum along with the plantation whistlings of their fellows. It’s like a deafness to nails on the chalkboard or something. They can’t pick out the bestial subtleties or discords of error in the predilections of their interlocutor. There is no free will possible for some of them, they are simply walking, talking nails on a chalkboard. Really, this type of tasteless personality involves all of the senses in a unity if we were to be more accurate, i.e. it’s not just sound, it’s also sound AND odor in a sense. And the experience of them obviously goes beyond all of the senses, because using the senses is only figurative. Like Agamben says, it’s a sort of sixth sense, distinct from the others. It’s clear to me, for instance, that the chinese don’t have this faculty developed very much. It’s kind of a vestigial organ in the sense that it’s such a curse, like who wants it if it mostly only detects the opposite of beauty in the world? All this talk is interpreted as “bad food” to the lowbrows. “That’s gross! Grossly immoral, to be so severe.” In regard to personality it’s closely related to gradations of freedom. Philistines find you to be a nasty person if you recognize the unfreedom of others. That’s what it is that’s like nails on a chalkboard. You approach the other expecting not to find a mere thing. And you feel let down when you (inadvertently) determine their precise gradation of freedom.