Is beauty truly "in the eye of the beholder"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lepanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lepanto

Guest
Or are there objective standards of beauty which transcend cultural and temporal boundaries?

If so, what are those standards?
 
i was having this discussion (somewhat) in another thread.

I think we could agree on a very basic general objective view of beauty but it becomes extremely diffciult to get too detailed or exact.

Beauty could be considered that which we all find attractive and pleasurable to look at and enjoy its presence. I think even this small defintion could be rehashed better and expanded upon but it might be a start.

Secondly, perhaps beauty is something more along the lines of taste. Soemthing that is not quite objective but not quite subjective. Really a third possibility in a way.

I guess this is good enough a place to start as any. 👍
 
I think as people almost universally find beauty in order and proportionality rather than in disorder or chaos–both visually and audially (sp?). God being the principle perfection–including perfect beauty–it would make sense that the closer things get to Him, the more beautiful they are.

For example, the two links below are two basic paintings of flowers. One is more ordered and the other more chaotic–I think it would be pretty universal to think the more ordered as beautiful–that doesn’t mean the other picture is valueless as often times beauty is not the intent of art; it can also convey emotions or ideas that are not beautiful.

mcgrathfoundation.com.au/events/images/painting.jpg
modernart-painting.com/images/modern_art_paintings_21st.-merello._some_flowers(130x81).jpg
 
As usual the answer is yes and no

Certainly there are variations across cultures, ethnicities, and even individuals

But yes there are norms that seem to be world wide

Basically humans prefer others who look strong, healthy, and young(ish)

Taller is usually better (especially for males)
Certain waist-to-hip and waist-to-bust ratios are preferred in women

All the rest are just details
 
I think as people almost universally find beauty in order and proportionality rather than in disorder or chaos–both visually and audially (sp?). God being the principle perfection–including perfect beauty–it would make sense that the closer things get to Him, the more beautiful they are.

For example, the two links below are two basic paintings of flowers. One is more ordered and the other more chaotic–I think it would be pretty universal to think the more ordered as beautiful–that doesn’t mean the other picture is valueless as often times beauty is not the intent of art; it can also convey emotions or ideas that are not beautiful.

mcgrathfoundation.com.au/events/images/painting.jpg
modernart-painting.com/images/modern_art_paintings_21st.-merello._some_flowers(130x81).jpg
good call.👍
 
This is a great question! And, I think that there is an objective standard of beauty. This has already been alluded to, but since I’ve played the Thomist card in other threads recently, I’ll play it here as well. There have been an enormous number of theories concerning what Kant and others call “aesthetics” since around 400 years ago. I’m not sure why, but since the Enlightenment, theories of beauty have multiplied. The scholastics saw beauty, or pulchris, as a transcendental of all being. Following the analogy of being, beauty if fully exemplified in God, and other forms of beauty are derivative of His sublime beauty.

The subjective reaction to beauty is that we are attracted to the beautiful thing through our senses, usually. But, there seems to be more to beauty than what we sense. And, while beauty involves “completeness” and truth, there’s something about it that seems elusive. For example, the ruins of an old abbey in a surrounding landscape are beautiful. Take a look at this abbey scene. It isn’t beautiful strictly due to visual elements, as there are broken arches, and an incomplete building, but there are other elements to the whole scene that present themselves such as “wholeness”, “variety” and “harmony”. And, it isn’t that beauty somehow captures the true without also capturing the good. We desire the beautiful thing, as we desire all things that are good (or at least, apparently good). So, beauty somehow inheres in all of being (reality) and manifests itself in many different ways. I would say that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” in a certain sense, but it isn’t purely subjective.
 
Another way of saying this is: everyone is entitled to his own opinion, no matter how wrong it is.

Matthew
 
I am thinking if the Cleopatra’s nose been shorter , the whole history of the world would been different . 🙂

They say , that that is the best part of beauty , which a picture can not express.
 
Yes indeed, but the eyes of the beholder are simply windows for his/her spirit.
“And God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.” Genesis 1:31
Deacon Raymond
 
Or are there objective standards of beauty which transcend cultural and temporal boundaries?

If so, what are those standards?
There is excellent Shakespeare scholar - Wilson Night !
I think Wilson Night has discovered the hidden meanings and hidden doctrines in Shakespeares works.
If you are interesting in understanding of beauty.
I offer you to read his works on Shakespeare.
Wilson Night’s works have a lot to do with theology.
 
The Platonic view, of course, is that Beauty itself is a Form, existing in the realm of Forms, outside the material world. Beautiful things are beautiful because they partake of Beauty. God is the ultimate source of Beauty. Granting some latitude in terms, one might even say that God is Beauty, or that Beauty is God.

Plato described a spiritual practice based on the contemplation of Beauty, more or less as follows:
  1. Consider a beautiful object.
  2. Consider the beauty of the object.
  3. Consider beauty in general, as manifest generally in such or other objects.
  4. Consider Beauty itself, the source of all those instances of beauty.
  5. From there to consider God himself, the source of Beauty
The Neoplatonist, Plotinus (whose ideas St. Augustine knew well), elaborated on this in his Enneads, around 270 AD. Here’s a link to Plotinus’ famous tractate on Beauty:

eawc.evansville.edu/anthology/beauty.htm

ficino
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top