What is the origin of beauty? Why is it that things are sometimes beautiful?

Isaac Shmukler

It might be that beauty doesn't have a general origin. That is to say that things are beautiful for reasons that are numerous as the things are numerous. I believe however, that beauty does have a general origin or at least a few common factors. I am willing to engage in a discussion regarding two questions:
Does beauty have a general origin? If so, then what is it?

Dimitra

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio

tim wood

As usual in nearly all cases, if you defined your terms, you'd likely find your answers. What do you say beauty is?

Isaac Shmukler

↪tim wood

Beauty is the quality that hold sights or sounds that give rise to a pleasant feeling. More precisely, it is the quality of sights or sounds that give rise to a feeling of appreciation. This addition excludes for example, a pleasant feeling that is due to a sexual stimulation.

tim wood

↪Isaac Shmukler

All right. So beauty is in the beholder?

Isaac Shmukler

↪tim wood

It is a quality of sights and sounds that depends upon the beholder.

tim wood

Ah. The sights and sounds depend on the beholder.

Isaac Shmukler

↪tim wood

It's clearer to put it this way: This is a quality that is defined through the appreciation of the beholder.

Isaac Shmukler

Consider the concept "wanted". What is the definition of "wanted"?
The quality of things that one wants. It is the same by beauty.

tim wood

Me: So, it's a something from somewhere that the beholder decides is beautiful?

You, "No, it's the quality of the thing itelf!"

Me: and that quality is?

tim wood

↪Isaac Shmukler

Can't have a want without a wanter. It's the wanter's want. He (she) is the one who decides.

Isaac Shmukler

↪tim wood

The quality is that it is appreciated just as the example above of "wanted."

Isaac Shmukler

↪tim wood

I agree with that. The beholder decides whether something is beautiful. Although it might be yet beautiful since another beholder appreciates it.

tim wood

To convert passive to active: someone appreciates. Let's grant there's something that is appreciated. But who decides to appreciate it? And why?

Isaac Shmukler

I mean that, even if one decided that something isn't beautiful, it yet might be beautiful since someone else decided that it is beautiful.

tim wood

Although it might be yet beautiful since another beholder appreciates it. — Isaac Shmukler

Two beholders agree. What do they agree on? That something is beautiful? That means that they agree - what does that have to do with the stimulus?

Isaac Shmukler

↪tim wood

They agree on a broader sens of beautiful: Appreciated by an important group of people.

tim wood

I mean that, even if one decided that something isn't beautiful, it yet might be beautiful since someone else decided that it is beautiful. — Isaac Shmukler

Circles. Somehow you have to grasp that if you're going to refer to something, it' good to be able to say something about it. Not-so-easy with the beautiful. But that does not make the problem go away.

Isaac Shmukler

I should be honest

↪tim wood

I think that beautiful has many senses. When one says that something that is importantly accepted as beautiful is not beautiful, this refers to another meaning of beautiful.

tim wood

They agree on a broader sens of beautiful: Appreciated by an important group of people. — Isaac Shmukler

Seriously? You define or understand something as beautiful because some group of people says it is, whether you think it or not?

Isaac Shmukler

I mean that beautiful will be always according to a particular beholder.

Isaac Shmukler

This is like the adjective "tasty."

tim wood

I do not know what beautiful is. I know what I like, and I listen sometimes to the opinions of other people as to what they like. But beautiful is not-so-easy. But it's your topic. Somehow you've got to put a handle on it.

tim wood

Beauty in the beholder then. Settle on that?

Isaac Shmukler

If there is a disagreement about whether something is tasty it is really not a disagreement and no one is wrong.

tim wood

If there is a disagreement about whether something is tasty it is really not a disagreement and no one is wrong. — Isaac Shmukler

Seems a fair start.

Isaac Shmukler

...

Isaac Shmukler

Beautiful is just like tasty i don't want to be more confusing.

tim wood

but it is an object's quality according to the beholder. — Isaac Shmukler

Hmm. You would like us to grant that something, somehow, emanates from the thing "beheld"?

Isaac Shmukler

I admit that "according" is confusing and should be omitted. I'm sorry for that.

Isaac Shmukler

Beautiful is just like tasty, no one is wrong!

What is the origin of beauty? Why is it that things are sometimes beautiful?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions