Ray writes
Quote:lol, well there's a good starting point for "what is ugly"?
I'd say it's something that we see as disturbing or that is unpleasant to our sight.
From these premises, we can also derive that beauty is something that we know to be "non-disturbing" and that is pleasant to our sight.
In this case we have an experience attachment to something, and a perceptual factor. I think that the combination of both might be what we usually consider as beautiful. Also, by experience I would also include a rational analysis of the experience
But you see that isn't quite it for me. Some things I see as ugly but it isn't disturbing or unpleasant to me as in a pair of really ugly shoes.
Conversely there are many things that are pleasing to me that I don't find particular beautiful. I used the example of daisies before--happy, friendly little flowers they are and I like them and enjoy them in my garden, but they are not particularly beautiful to me. On the other hand a flawless large white rose is. And I wonder why one and not the other?
beauty is only skin deep.
but ugly goes clean to the bone!
I always thought about this, too. "Who taught me that a sunset is beautiful" and things like that... I always thought Martial arts is beautiful.
That's it exactly, Zeroh. Who taught me that a rose is beautiful and a bad haircut isn't? Why is one person beautiful to look at to me and another not?
And welcome to A2K by the way.
Who taught you those things Foxy is who taught you those things.You should know who they are better than us.
Someone getting you out of a bad fix will be beautiful no matter what haircut they have.And if ever you fall backwards onto a rose bush you will discover that roses have an ugly side.
Your error is in thinking these things innate.And being used to the cradle of luxury.
Then Spendius, if these things are not inate, then enlighten me. Who taught me? I have had to have medical treatment as a result of the rose's thorn, and yet the rose is no less beautiful to me. A daisy has never harmed me and yet it is not beautiful to me as the rose is beautiful.
I think it is inate. So far it has defied explanation.
Would you like a blunt explanation Foxy?
BTW Foxy
The science of beauty is called Kalology.Aesthetics is the laws and principles determining beauty.
spendius writes
Quote:Would you like a blunt explanation Foxy?
No, just specific ones if you have them. So far your contributions to this thread have been entertaining as always, but have also been quite vague and nonspecific in addressing the actual question.
Quote:The science of beauty is called Kalology.Aesthetics is the laws and principles determining beauty.
Actually the study of beauty is called Kalology, more commonly called 'Aesthetics'. It is generally one of the more useless college bird courses that football players take so they can keep their eligibility to play.
Foxy-
Thank you for absolving me from the blunt explanation.I prefer the vague and nonspecific in cases like this.
Football players certainly understand the beauty of a goal or even an illegal move which goes un-noticed.
beauty is just one of many similar words, attractive, appealing, nice, lovely, interesting, interesting in an appealing way, interesting in an aesthtically pleasing way, interesting in a logical way. the answer is you feel if somehting is beautiful, if you want to analize that feeling you can, however, once you analize the feeling you know consciously what is beautiful, before you analized it you just felt what is beautiful.
