From David Hume's "Of the Standard of Taste" (1757)

"Many and frequent are the defects in the internal organs which prevent or weaken the influence of those general principles, on which depends our sentiment of beauty or deformity. Though some objects, by the structure of the mind, be naturally calculated to give pleasure, it is not to be expected, that in every individual the pleasure will be equally felt. Particular incidents and situations occur, which either throw a false light on the objects, or hinder the true from conveying to the imagination the proper sentiment and perception.

One obvious cause, why many feel not the proper sentiment of beauty, is the want of that delicacy of imagination, which is requisite to convey a sensibility of those finer emotions. This delicacy everyone pretends to: everyone talks about it; and would reduce every kind of taste or sentiment to its standard. But as our intention in this essay is to mingle some light of the understanding with the feeling of the sentiment, it will be proper to give a more accurate definition of delicacy than has been hitherto attempted....

Where the organs are so fine, as to allow nothing to escape them; and at the same time so exact as to perceive every ingredient in the composition: this we call delicacy of taste, where we employ these terms in the literal or metaphorical sense."

Hume believed that taste was a separate standard which could be taught: Marianne seems to agree with him. And why not? I think Henry Tilney improves Catherine's artistic taste, at Beechen Cliff, does he not? Mr Knightley's "taste" for Emma's drawing of Harriet seems to be far more accurate (if not "delicate") than Mr Elton's- and if anybody epitomises good taste and good judgement, it's surely Mr K.