To some extent, I'll accept "arbitrary", but I wonder, if they're "wise", how "arbitrary" they are, if the criteria for their selection could be deemed to be valid? But then, of course, how arbitrary is validity without a human context?
I think "true objectivity" exists in Art as much as it exists in material reality, in that, despite its undeniable existence, it is, wholly, unintelligible to any one individual, given that we have (subjective) experiences of things, not things themselves. If a human's brain is of a non-standard form, for some reason, then they may understand different collections of notes or rhythms in an entirely different way to the majority of humans, thus P. Diddy's latest turd could be perceived to be more enlightening and more relevant than the metaphorical Sound Which Started the Universe. This same person's brain may interpret the colour red as the sensation of a grape entering an artery. For the individual, this is truth.