There is no objective concept of "beauty"

[BidenPresident]

Eventually Doc Dutch got tired of stalking me. Looks like this psycho cupressus will take a while.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Eventually Doc Dutch got tired of stalking me. Looks like this psycho cupressus will take a while.

YOU ARE ON MY THREAD HOW AM I STALKING YOU???

You honestly do seem like you have some issues.

 

[BidenPresident]

Same symptoms of mental illness.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Same symptoms of mental illness.

Do you feel that irony is a form of beauty? Is it universally appreciated? I feel it is not universally appreciated. In fact I see many who can't identify it, let alone appreciate it.

 

[Cypress]

So the "colorblind" and mentally unbalanced are not humans?
.

I'm not going to write "fully functional human being" every time I mention universal values, because it is self evident.

Blind people undoubtedly would like to be able to see Yosemite or a sunset. Schizophrenics who are treated with medication reacquire their fully human need for aesthetic sensibility.

 

[Cypress]

You know there are entire art movements that rejoice in the decay of urban settings and trashiness.

John Waters has made a pretty good living exploiting trash and things which most don't call "beautiful".

There's nobody who desires to live in a rat infested apartment, in a decaying urban concrete jungle.

Even if there are a handful that do, they are so statistically insignificant as to have no meaningful influence on the universal and objectively true value humans put on beauty and aesthetics.

There are deviations from Newton's laws of mechanics at relativistic conditions, but despite these exceptions nobody minds calling Newton's laws universal in everyday lexicon.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

I'm not going to write "fully functional human being" every time I mention universal values, because it is self evident.

Blind people undoubtedly would like to be able to see Yosemite or a sunset. Schizophrenics who are treated with medication reacquire their fully human need for aesthetic sensibility.

You seem to be of the impression that those who don't find a sunset beautiful are either non-functional or schizophrenic.

I don't see any evidence that that is necessarily true.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

There's nobody who desires to live in a rat infested apartment, in a decaying urban concrete jungle.

Even if there are a handful that do, they are so statistically insignificant as to have no meaningful influence on the universal and objectively true value humans put on beauty and aesthetics.

There are deviations from Newton's laws of mechanics at relativistic conditions, but despite these exceptions nobody minds calling Newton's laws universal in everyday lexicon.

Statistical Insignificance does not enter into a "universal". It is either 100% or nothing.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

I'm not going to write "fully functional human being" every time I mention universal values, because it is self evident.

Blind people undoubtedly would like to be able to see Yosemite or a sunset. Schizophrenics who are treated with medication reacquire their fully human need for aesthetic sensibility.

Honestly this still seems too much like a "No True Scotsman" fallacy. If one fails to find a sunset beautiful by your metric they must be a "schizophrenic". No "true human" would fail to find sunsets beautiful.

If the claim is "People like what they like" I'm 100% down with that being a "universal". It is a tautology but technically true for all people. But that isn't the claim. The claim is beauty has an objective truth to it.

But all one need do is find a case where one person finds something beautiful and another doesn't to show that this is not supportable as a "Universal truth".