system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
If there isn't an objective truth, where does the authority of a art critic come from?

For the sake of argument we will follow the following premise that there is not an objective truth. 

Recently I was wondering this. "If there is no" good taste "or" bad taste "to appreciate art, where does the judgment of an art critic come from?"

&#x200B;
gpt
You're asking two questions: first, if there is no objective truth, where does their authority come from, and second, if there is no good taste or bad taste, where does their judgment come from.

With respect to the first, they might be good at articulating compelling points, or good at drawing on knowledge of other works of art, or good at guessing what the typical reader cares about, or good at touching on enough points to cover stuff that most readers will care about, or knowledgeable about the subjective truths of the matter, and so on.

With respect to the second, first of all please note that "no objective truth" does not lead to "there is no good taste or bad taste." There's no *objective* good taste or bad taste, but there could be good taste or bad taste. But in any case, if there somehow weren't good taste or bad taste, judgment could come from basically anywhere! There aren't any standards!