Beauty, a Rival to Truth and Good?
Einstein was said to have rejected the theories of Quantum Mechanics, which he was instrumental in devising, because they lacked beauty. He was constantly attempting to improve on QM; he constantly looked for something more pleasing to his aesthetic considerations.
Physics has discovered the power of symmetry. It has, as I comprehend it, become as important to certain physics considerations as is the conservation of energy and momentum. I suspect that symmetry is very important in our judgments regarding beauty.
It is generally accepted that the characteristics of “esthetic feeling or of the aesthetic judgment (aesthetic value) are due to social conditions.
Aesthetic judgment expresses a value, and hence implies a subjective element; but this value is not always apprehended as subjective, private, and relative, but rather as universal. It represents a confluence of emotion and intellection. In this context universality means “super-individual and “implies that my attitude toward the aesthetic object is not individual, but is possible for any of my fellows.
“The aesthetic consciousness in its beginnings is connected with art rather than with nature¦Art has not arisen primarily to satisfy an already existing love of beauty¦Art has its origins, almost without exception, in social relations; the explanation of the aesthetic categories is to be sought largely in social psychology.
A widely recognized characteristic of the aesthetic attitude is one of detachment, or freedom from desire, and positively as an immediacy, or purely intense pleasure independent of desire; Kant described it as disinterestedness; a contemplative attitude; in Schiller as play. Recent writers, I think, tend to accentuate this detachment; it is sometimes called semblance, imitation, conscious self-illusion, or make-believe. The work of art is a closed unity; the aesthetic object is a world apart.
An additional characteristic of the aesthetic is stated as a "widening of our life of feeling toward the typical, comprehensive, and universal. “Aristotle and Hegel emphasize the universality of the aesthetic object. It expresses an idea that gives the human and not merely the particular.
There seems to be a congruence between play, i.e. make believe, and art. Aesthetic pleasure arises partially due to ease of adjustment, which “is favored by unity, symmetry, rhythm, etc. In that all sapiens seem to harbor a similar disposition; we might assume such characteristics will give pleasure to all.
Aesthetic pleasure often seems to undergo a growing toward an objective sense, in that often, at first perception when we might distrust our judgment, our first judgment might be “I like this. In such a moment we certainly regard the sensation as aesthetic but not universal. Under further examination our attitude switches to “This is great or perhaps even “This is sublime and further still to “This is heroic. We might very well say that this sequence from “This is good to “This is great is passing from a purely subjective to a universal evaluation partially do to “the substitution of a social and objective attitude.
The universality may be due in part a consideration as to how far I am really viewing the object as an expert and to whether the object stirs a genuinely social feeling. Universality of a mere numerical form may “belong much more to a judgment respecting strawberries than to judgments respecting Wagner. The aesthetic universality is qualitative and internal, not quantitative and external. It means that I judge as from a standpoint that has been created and developed within me largely by the “social experience and expression.
Kant expressed a category of the aesthetic as disinterestedness or detachment, and freedom; and it may have reference to a “certain absence of egoistic desire, and this quality stands almost necessarily to be enjoyed by contemplation. Another aspect of the aesthetic to be noted under this category of disinterestedness is the aspect of freedom, of detachment from reality, or "make-believe; the imagination of spectator as well as of artist must widen beyond the present reality.
“The claim is, that the various forms of art have been the most effective means of developing this free-play and the attendant delight. Further, in certain of the arts, notably the drama, we find a form of tension and excitement which, like certain of the games of childhood, or certain of the sports of mature life, suggests previous periods in the race-history when life itself, as maintained by fishing or hunting, in battle or strategy, was a process containing far more of emotional strain and stimulation than the life of civilization."
Can you imagine aesthetic value as having a universal quality, i.e. a quality that comes primarily from the object versus one that comes primarily from the subject? I think that all judgments have both objective and subjective components. I think that if we imagine a stick with ‘totally objective’ on one end and ‘totally subjective’ on the other that all judgments lie somewhere between these two end points.
Beauty, a rival to Truth and Good?
Beauty, a rival to Truth and Good?
coberst;531117 wrote: Beauty, a Rival to Truth and Good?
Einstein was said to have rejected the theories of Quantum Mechanics, which he was instrumental in devising, because they lacked beauty. He was constantly attempting to improve on QM; he constantly looked for something more pleasing to his aesthetic considerations.
Physics has discovered the power of symmetry. It has, as I comprehend it, become as important to certain physics considerations as is the conservation of energy and momentum. I suspect that symmetry is very important in our judgments regarding beauty.
It is generally accepted that the characteristics of “esthetic feeling or of the aesthetic judgment (aesthetic value) are due to social conditions.
Aesthetic judgment expresses a value, and hence implies a subjective element; but this value is not always apprehended as subjective, private, and relative, but rather as universal. It represents a confluence of emotion and intellection. In this context universality means “super-individual and “implies that my attitude toward the aesthetic object is not individual, but is possible for any of my fellows.
“The aesthetic consciousness in its beginnings is connected with art rather than with nature¦Art has not arisen primarily to satisfy an already existing love of beauty¦Art has its origins, almost without exception, in social relations; the explanation of the aesthetic categories is to be sought largely in social psychology.
A widely recognized characteristic of the aesthetic attitude is one of detachment, or freedom from desire, and positively as an immediacy, or purely intense pleasure independent of desire; Kant described it as disinterestedness; a contemplative attitude; in Schiller as play. Recent writers, I think, tend to accentuate this detachment; it is sometimes called semblance, imitation, conscious self-illusion, or make-believe. The work of art is a closed unity; the aesthetic object is a world apart.
An additional characteristic of the aesthetic is stated as a "widening of our life of feeling toward the typical, comprehensive, and universal. “Aristotle and Hegel emphasize the universality of the aesthetic object. It expresses an idea that gives the human and not merely the particular.
There seems to be a congruence between play, i.e. make believe, and art. Aesthetic pleasure arises partially due to ease of adjustment, which “is favored by unity, symmetry, rhythm, etc. In that all sapiens seem to harbor a similar disposition; we might assume such characteristics will give pleasure to all.
Aesthetic pleasure often seems to undergo a growing toward an objective sense, in that often, at first perception when we might distrust our judgment, our first judgment might be “I like this. In such a moment we certainly regard the sensation as aesthetic but not universal. Under further examination our attitude switches to “This is great or perhaps even “This is sublime and further still to “This is heroic. We might very well say that this sequence from “This is good to “This is great is passing from a purely subjective to a universal evaluation partially do to “the substitution of a social and objective attitude.
The universality may be due in part a consideration as to how far I am really viewing the object as an expert and to whether the object stirs a genuinely social feeling. Universality of a mere numerical form may “belong much more to a judgment respecting strawberries than to judgments respecting Wagner. The aesthetic universality is qualitative and internal, not quantitative and external. It means that I judge as from a standpoint that has been created and developed within me largely by the “social experience and expression.
Kant expressed a category of the aesthetic as disinterestedness or detachment, and freedom; and it may have reference to a “certain absence of egoistic desire, and this quality stands almost necessarily to be enjoyed by contemplation. Another aspect of the aesthetic to be noted under this category of disinterestedness is the aspect of freedom, of detachment from reality, or "make-believe; the imagination of spectator as well as of artist must widen beyond the present reality.
“The claim is, that the various forms of art have been the most effective means of developing this free-play and the attendant delight. Further, in certain of the arts, notably the drama, we find a form of tension and excitement which, like certain of the games of childhood, or certain of the sports of mature life, suggests previous periods in the race-history when life itself, as maintained by fishing or hunting, in battle or strategy, was a process containing far more of emotional strain and stimulation than the life of civilization."
Can you imagine aesthetic value as having a universal quality, i.e. a quality that comes primarily from the object versus one that comes primarily from the subject? I think that all judgments have both objective and subjective components. I think that if we imagine a stick with ‘totally objective’ on one end and ‘totally subjective’ on the other that all judgments lie somewhere between these two end points.
Neils Bohr once said, "He who is not deeply troubled by quantum physics has not understood it."
I've seen studies where infants from various ethnic backgrounds are shown faces, and they respond positively to very universal standards of beauty, not necessarily their own ethnicity, but the small noses, high cheekbones, etc., that Madison Ave. sells us as universal beauty. No cultural conditioning was possible, as they hadn't lived long enough for that to occur. Advertisers don't condition us to buy what they're selling, they sell what they recognize as universal instincts in us.
My extremely limited understanding of the quantum world, strings, superstrings, leads me to think that the universe is vibrating. It appears to organize itself in highly systematic ways, and doesn't seem to waste a single quark. It appears to recycle everything.
This seems consistent with what I know about Traditional Chinese Medicine, which informs much of my professional life. The Taoist model for the universe, of which TCM is an integral part, mirrors what I've been able to glean, thusfar, from quantum physics.
There is a phrase that, I believe first appeared in the Upanishads which translates to "As above, so below." This suggests that the authors knew that levels of organization were consistent, from the very large to the very small.
All this suggests to me that cultural conditioning serves merely in a support role to reinforce action that is much more basic. For example, a .7 waist to hips ratio in human females is a powerful, subliminal signal of fecundity to human males. In the 60's a model appeared on the scene named Twiggy, who, on the surface was completely atypical of what female beauty was supposed to be at that time. And yet, on closer examination, she had the perfect .7 waist to hips ratio. We wanted her, even though we weren't fully concious of why.
In terms of our collective conciousness as a species, we seem to be coming full circle, and reconnecting with ideas that were first espoused by the adepts living about 5000 years, or so, ago. How they knew these things, I don't know, but it appears that they at least had an awareness of something much larger than themselves.
It always seems to come back to interconncectedness, for me, and integrating everything would follow as a practical, albeit extremely difficult, undertaking.
Transpersonal psychologist Ken Wilber appears to be the person who's attempting to go after this idea on a global scale
Einstein was said to have rejected the theories of Quantum Mechanics, which he was instrumental in devising, because they lacked beauty. He was constantly attempting to improve on QM; he constantly looked for something more pleasing to his aesthetic considerations.
Physics has discovered the power of symmetry. It has, as I comprehend it, become as important to certain physics considerations as is the conservation of energy and momentum. I suspect that symmetry is very important in our judgments regarding beauty.
It is generally accepted that the characteristics of “esthetic feeling or of the aesthetic judgment (aesthetic value) are due to social conditions.
Aesthetic judgment expresses a value, and hence implies a subjective element; but this value is not always apprehended as subjective, private, and relative, but rather as universal. It represents a confluence of emotion and intellection. In this context universality means “super-individual and “implies that my attitude toward the aesthetic object is not individual, but is possible for any of my fellows.
“The aesthetic consciousness in its beginnings is connected with art rather than with nature¦Art has not arisen primarily to satisfy an already existing love of beauty¦Art has its origins, almost without exception, in social relations; the explanation of the aesthetic categories is to be sought largely in social psychology.
A widely recognized characteristic of the aesthetic attitude is one of detachment, or freedom from desire, and positively as an immediacy, or purely intense pleasure independent of desire; Kant described it as disinterestedness; a contemplative attitude; in Schiller as play. Recent writers, I think, tend to accentuate this detachment; it is sometimes called semblance, imitation, conscious self-illusion, or make-believe. The work of art is a closed unity; the aesthetic object is a world apart.
An additional characteristic of the aesthetic is stated as a "widening of our life of feeling toward the typical, comprehensive, and universal. “Aristotle and Hegel emphasize the universality of the aesthetic object. It expresses an idea that gives the human and not merely the particular.
There seems to be a congruence between play, i.e. make believe, and art. Aesthetic pleasure arises partially due to ease of adjustment, which “is favored by unity, symmetry, rhythm, etc. In that all sapiens seem to harbor a similar disposition; we might assume such characteristics will give pleasure to all.
Aesthetic pleasure often seems to undergo a growing toward an objective sense, in that often, at first perception when we might distrust our judgment, our first judgment might be “I like this. In such a moment we certainly regard the sensation as aesthetic but not universal. Under further examination our attitude switches to “This is great or perhaps even “This is sublime and further still to “This is heroic. We might very well say that this sequence from “This is good to “This is great is passing from a purely subjective to a universal evaluation partially do to “the substitution of a social and objective attitude.
The universality may be due in part a consideration as to how far I am really viewing the object as an expert and to whether the object stirs a genuinely social feeling. Universality of a mere numerical form may “belong much more to a judgment respecting strawberries than to judgments respecting Wagner. The aesthetic universality is qualitative and internal, not quantitative and external. It means that I judge as from a standpoint that has been created and developed within me largely by the “social experience and expression.
Kant expressed a category of the aesthetic as disinterestedness or detachment, and freedom; and it may have reference to a “certain absence of egoistic desire, and this quality stands almost necessarily to be enjoyed by contemplation. Another aspect of the aesthetic to be noted under this category of disinterestedness is the aspect of freedom, of detachment from reality, or "make-believe; the imagination of spectator as well as of artist must widen beyond the present reality.
“The claim is, that the various forms of art have been the most effective means of developing this free-play and the attendant delight. Further, in certain of the arts, notably the drama, we find a form of tension and excitement which, like certain of the games of childhood, or certain of the sports of mature life, suggests previous periods in the race-history when life itself, as maintained by fishing or hunting, in battle or strategy, was a process containing far more of emotional strain and stimulation than the life of civilization."
Can you imagine aesthetic value as having a universal quality, i.e. a quality that comes primarily from the object versus one that comes primarily from the subject? I think that all judgments have both objective and subjective components. I think that if we imagine a stick with ‘totally objective’ on one end and ‘totally subjective’ on the other that all judgments lie somewhere between these two end points.
Neils Bohr once said, "He who is not deeply troubled by quantum physics has not understood it."
I've seen studies where infants from various ethnic backgrounds are shown faces, and they respond positively to very universal standards of beauty, not necessarily their own ethnicity, but the small noses, high cheekbones, etc., that Madison Ave. sells us as universal beauty. No cultural conditioning was possible, as they hadn't lived long enough for that to occur. Advertisers don't condition us to buy what they're selling, they sell what they recognize as universal instincts in us.
My extremely limited understanding of the quantum world, strings, superstrings, leads me to think that the universe is vibrating. It appears to organize itself in highly systematic ways, and doesn't seem to waste a single quark. It appears to recycle everything.
This seems consistent with what I know about Traditional Chinese Medicine, which informs much of my professional life. The Taoist model for the universe, of which TCM is an integral part, mirrors what I've been able to glean, thusfar, from quantum physics.
There is a phrase that, I believe first appeared in the Upanishads which translates to "As above, so below." This suggests that the authors knew that levels of organization were consistent, from the very large to the very small.
All this suggests to me that cultural conditioning serves merely in a support role to reinforce action that is much more basic. For example, a .7 waist to hips ratio in human females is a powerful, subliminal signal of fecundity to human males. In the 60's a model appeared on the scene named Twiggy, who, on the surface was completely atypical of what female beauty was supposed to be at that time. And yet, on closer examination, she had the perfect .7 waist to hips ratio. We wanted her, even though we weren't fully concious of why.
In terms of our collective conciousness as a species, we seem to be coming full circle, and reconnecting with ideas that were first espoused by the adepts living about 5000 years, or so, ago. How they knew these things, I don't know, but it appears that they at least had an awareness of something much larger than themselves.
It always seems to come back to interconncectedness, for me, and integrating everything would follow as a practical, albeit extremely difficult, undertaking.
Transpersonal psychologist Ken Wilber appears to be the person who's attempting to go after this idea on a global scale
Beauty, a rival to Truth and Good?
You're SUCH a philosopher! :yh_rotfl
My candle's burning at both ends, it will not last the night. But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--It gives a lovely light!--Edna St. Vincent Millay
Beauty, a rival to Truth and Good?
JAMES HAYDEN TUFTS Aesthetic Categories
http://spartan.ac.brocku.ca/~lward/Tuft ... _1903.html
I failed to reference my source.
http://spartan.ac.brocku.ca/~lward/Tuft ... _1903.html
I failed to reference my source.
Beauty, a rival to Truth and Good?
Objective or Subjective: It’s all a matter of degree
If we place the concept ‘subjective’ on one end of a stick and the concept ‘objective’ on the other end every matter of fact will fall some where in between.
The most objective truth might be “It is raining on me, the most subjective truth might be “This grass tastes good. Something that might fall exactly in the middle might be “I love you.
I suspect we might take the three major classifications of human thought--aesthetic, real, and moral—i.e. beauty, truth, and good—and find propositions within those domains with the same relationship to subjectivity and objectivity.
If all of this is true does that not cause you to change your ideas about many things? We seem to give such great weight to something being objective and such little to something being subjective when it is all a matter of degree.
If we place the concept ‘subjective’ on one end of a stick and the concept ‘objective’ on the other end every matter of fact will fall some where in between.
The most objective truth might be “It is raining on me, the most subjective truth might be “This grass tastes good. Something that might fall exactly in the middle might be “I love you.
I suspect we might take the three major classifications of human thought--aesthetic, real, and moral—i.e. beauty, truth, and good—and find propositions within those domains with the same relationship to subjectivity and objectivity.
If all of this is true does that not cause you to change your ideas about many things? We seem to give such great weight to something being objective and such little to something being subjective when it is all a matter of degree.
Beauty, a rival to Truth and Good?
Diuretic;532291 wrote: Part of the Human Condition (*drum roll*). You're quite right of course, everything's all mixed up but when you're referring particularly to aesthetics then I will hold that the judgements made are learned behaviours and aren't innate (note again I'm referring to aesthetic judgements and not sexual allure and response).
One thing I did think about was symmetry. "What immortal hand or eye could frame they fearful symmetry?" As Blake so eloquently put it. I'm thinking that an appreciation of symmetry is so deep within us that I also suspect it's a universal. Now the scientific minded will have to step in here because when it gets to cosmology I'm well out of my depth. But I wonder if symmetry isn't part of the universe itself.
You are right on the mark. I have read several books that tried to teach me the nature of symmetry and its importance in the science of physics and I must admit it was a failure. I found it to be very difficult to comprehend. I did, however, learn enough to discover that physicists use this parameter much as they use the laws of conservation of energy and the conservation of momentum, whcih are fundamental natural characterists of the physical world.
One thing I did think about was symmetry. "What immortal hand or eye could frame they fearful symmetry?" As Blake so eloquently put it. I'm thinking that an appreciation of symmetry is so deep within us that I also suspect it's a universal. Now the scientific minded will have to step in here because when it gets to cosmology I'm well out of my depth. But I wonder if symmetry isn't part of the universe itself.
You are right on the mark. I have read several books that tried to teach me the nature of symmetry and its importance in the science of physics and I must admit it was a failure. I found it to be very difficult to comprehend. I did, however, learn enough to discover that physicists use this parameter much as they use the laws of conservation of energy and the conservation of momentum, whcih are fundamental natural characterists of the physical world.