There is no objective concept of "beauty"

Wait, you just said "objective" means true.

Now you say objective and true are different concepts.

No I didn't

Nobody chooses to go on a vacation of the abandoned factories of Toledo Ohio.

On the flip side, I don't think a rat cares if it lives in an abandoned Toledo factory, or in the Louvre in Paris


For me it comes to this: we can acquire objectively true knowledge about human ethics and human values, the same way we can acquire knowledge about science, history, and economics.

What I am rejecting is the notion that we cannot acquire any objectively true knowledge about human values because everything is supposedly relative and subjective.
 
I disagree

Ive never understood what the value is of minimizing things based on the opinion of a minority.

I suspect you won't care but if it's true you see just a sunset then I feel sorry for you.

Well id say a desert has it's beauty but it's not as beautiful as Switzerland

I agree that there is an objective reality to beauty for humans.

For visual beauty, the exceptions might be the colorblind, or the mentally unbalanced and emotionally damaged who are not, or cannot be in possession of aesthetic sensibilities.
 
I agree that there is an objective reality to beauty for humans.

For visual beauty, the exceptions might be the colorblind, or the mentally unbalanced and emotionally damaged who are not, or cannot be in possession of aesthetic sensibilities.

I do not understand your position. Everyone has to have the same judgement of beauty?
 
This is true, but a tautology. Everyone likes what they like. That is true of everyone. But also a meaningless statement. A thing is what it is which gives no useful information about the thing.

Kinda like- Depends on what the meaning of "Is" is- Kinda thangs! :laugh:
 
I agree that there is an objective reality to beauty for humans.

For visual beauty, the exceptions might be the colorblind, or the mentally unbalanced and emotionally damaged who are not, or cannot be in possession of aesthetic sensibilities.

I don't know of any other creature that can experience the beauty of anything.

I think in those cases beauty can be recognized albeit in an altered state.
 
I agree that there is an objective reality to beauty for humans.

For visual beauty, the exceptions might be the colorblind, or the mentally unbalanced and emotionally damaged who are not, or cannot be in possession of aesthetic sensibilities.

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



(Also can't stress enough that the perception of color is very much subjective. That's why the international committee on color back in the early 20th century developed a system of "tristimulus values" based on human perception as well as wavelength. Any intro book on color theory notes that color is "subjective" insofar as it is partially in the brain of the observer).
 
I don't know of any other creature that can experience the beauty of anything.

I think in those cases beauty can be recognized albeit in an altered state.

The fact that we feel sorry for economically disadvantaged poor kids who grow up in the concrete jungle of some dilapidated urban core, never having experienced a forest, a waterfall, or a sparkling beach clearly means we recognize the intrinsic and objective value of beauty.

I don't think mice care if they live in an dilapidated apartment building, or in the New York metropolitan opera house.
 
The fact that we feel sorry for economically disadvantaged poor kids who grow up in the concrete jungle of some dilapidated urban core, never having experienced a forest, a waterfall, or a sparkling beach clearly means we recognize the intrinsic and objective value of beauty.

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".
 
Back
Top