Telfer's description of the art of food as "simple" and "minor"

I feel as though a lot was said today in class on the subject, but I did not have the opportunity to express any of my own opinions on what we were presented with. I shall attempt to rectify that situation here.

I felt that Telfer's argument for the "less refined" nature of smell and taste was rather weak, at least in biological terms. She seems to discount, and indeed forward, the common misconception that smell and taste and weaker, inferior senses to vision and hearing. This is not the case. Indeed, our senses of smell and taste are capable of many fine distinctions. Some could argue that the art of food is to combine flavors to create a whole greater than the sum of its parts.

We did not yet mention memory. One argument brought up in Telfer's article was that the memory of smell and taste is weaker than that of vision or hearing. This is false. It is a biological fact that smell is a powerful sense linked to memory, due perhaps in part to it having the shortest pathway to our brains. Smell may not be useful for remembering facts from a book, but it is undeniably linked, quite powerfully, to our memories.

As a final note, as this blog is not being kept for credit, I will take a moment to editorialize. I was always under the impression that in a discussion-based college seminar, there would be a tad more civility in the classroom, particularly in regards to making comments. I do not appreciate raising my hand, making eye contact with the professor, and then having someone else start talking before I get the chance to open my mouth. It is rude, disrespectful, and to be frank, I find it quite frustrating. I hate to be the one to harken back to high school, but it is extremely rare for me to find something that frustrates me this much this early in a class. (This last paragraph may later be removed, at Professor Johnson's request.)

I shall close with a discussion question: in the section "Works of Art," Telfer describes the two different ways in which the term "work of art" is commonly used, specifically, as a classifying or evaluative term. Should the term be used in both senses, or is it more appropriate to use one sense over the other exclusively?