Uploaded by Abbas Rixvi

syed wajahat abbas 10466 (critical thinking)

The term “beauty” is customarily associated with aesthetic experience and typically refers to an
essential quality of something that arouses some type of reaction in the human observer — for
example, pleasure, calm, elevation, or delight. Beauty is attributed to both natural phenomena
(such as sunsets or mountains) as well as to human-made artifacts (such as paintings or
symphonies). There have been numerous theories over the millennia of Western philosophical
thought that attempt to define “beauty,” by either:
1. attributing it to “essential qualities” within the natural phenomenon or artifact, or
2. regarding it purely in terms of the experience of beauty by the human subject.
The former approach considers beauty objectively, as something that exists in its own right,
intrinsically, in the “something” or art object, independently of being experienced. The latter
strategy regards beauty subjectively, as something that occurs in the mind of the subject who
perceives beauty — beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. In Aesthetics, objectivity versus
subjectivity has been a matter of serious philosophical dispute not only with regard to the
nature of beauty but it also comes up in connection with judging the relative merits of pieces of
art, as we will see in the the topic on aesthetic judgement. Here we ask whether beauty itself
exists in the object (the natural phenomenon or the artifact) or purely within the subjective
experience of the object.
Objectivist Views
Some examples:
In the view of Plato (427-347 BCE), beauty resides in his domain of the Forms. Beauty is objective,
it is not about the experience of the observer. Plato’s conception of “objectivity” is atypical. The
world of Forms is “ideal” rather than material; Forms, and beauty, are non-physical ideas for
Plato. Yet beauty is objective in that it is not a feature of the observer’s experience.
Aristotle (384-322 BCE) too held an objective view of beauty, but one vastly different from
Plato’s. Beauty resides in what is being observed and is defined by characteristics of the art
object, such as symmetry, order, balance, and proportion. Such criteria hold, whether the object
is natural or man-made.
While they hold differing conceptions of what “beauty” is, Plato and Aristotle do agree that it is
a feature of the “object,” and not something in the mind of the beholder.
Subjectivist Views
Some examples:
David Hume (1711-1776) argued that beauty does not lie in “things” but is entirely subjective, a
matter of feelings and emotion. Beauty is in the mind of of the person beholding the object, and
what is beautiful to one observer may not be so to another.
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) believed that aesthetic judgement is based on feelings, in particular,
the feeling of pleasure. What brings pleasure is a matter of personal taste. Such judgements
involve neither cognition nor logic, and are therefore subjective. Beauty is defined by judgement
processes of the mind, it is not a feature of the thing judged to be beautiful.
A complication emerges with a purely subjective account of beauty, because the idea of beauty
becomes meaningless if everything is merely a matter of taste or personal preference. If beauty
is purely in the eye of the beholder, the idea of beauty has no value as an ideal comparable to
truth or goodness. Controversies arise over matters of taste; people can have strong opinions
regarding whether or not beauty is present, suggesting that perhaps there are some standards.
Both Hume and Kant were aware of this problem. Each, in his own way, attempted to diminish
it by lending a tone of objectivity to the idea of beauty.
Hume proposed that great examples of good taste emerge, as do respected authorities. Such
experts tend to have wide experience and knowledge, and subjective opinions among them tend
to agree.
Kant too was aware that subjective judgments of taste in art engender debates that do actually
lead to agreement on questions of beauty. This is possible if aesthetic experience occurs with a
disinterested attitude, unobstructed by personal feelings and preferences. We will return to
Kant’s notion of “disinterest” in the section on “Aesthetic Experience and Judgement.”
A supplemental resource (bottom of page) provides further details on the subjectivity and
objectivity of beauty.
The following TED talk by philosopher Denis Dutton (1944-2010) offers an unusual account of
beauty, based on evolution. He argues that the concept of beauty evolved deep within our
psyches for reasons related to survival.
The question of whether or not beauty exists in nature is a philosophical problem. In particular, there is
the question of whether artworks, persons, or nature has aesthetic qualities. Most people say that they
care about their own beauty. Moreover, they judge another person's appearance from an aesthetic
point of view using aesthetic concepts. However, aesthetic judgements are not objective in the sense
that the experience justifies their objectivity. By analysing Monroe C. Beardsley's theory of the
objectivity of aesthetic qualities, I examine whether there are really beautiful and ugly persons in the
world. I will criticize the way analytic philosophers judge people and art from an aesthetic perspective. If
there are no aesthetic qualities in the world, nobody can judge someone beautiful or ugly without
oppression. Aesthetic judgement is exercise of power.