Beauty is an ancient term. Beauty and Beautiful have been utilized as commodities, philosophies, Biblical concepts and have been political issues and Beauty and Beautiful want to be sciences.
"The English word Beauty has a wide range of meanings and connotations. Beauty and its derivatives can be applied as a noun, adjective, adverb and verb. There are Beautiful mathematical proofs and a Beautiful catch in baseball or Beautiful might mean “attractive” or even “sexy,” or may mean “well executed,” a beautiful a work of art, aesthetic or innovative in method.
"Regarding the Greeks in particular, we may be able to see how the modern conception of beauty, with whatever baggage of contradictions and tensions it carries, emerged in the first place, since Greek works of art and Greek ideas about art had a massive influence on the Western tradition, even if they were sometimes misunderstood (not that this is necessarily a terrible thing: misunderstanding is one of the great sources of creativity). [The secret history of beauty: How the Greeks invented Western civilization's biggest idea by David Konstan, Jan 4, 2015, Salon]
Quoting the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "The nature of Beauty is one of the most enduring and controversial themes in Western philosophy, and is, with the nature of art, one of the 2 fundamental issues in philosophical aesthetics. Beauty has traditionally been counted among the ultimate values, with goodness, truth, and justice.
“Beauty is a primary theme among ancient Greek, Hellenistic, and medieval philosophers, and was central to 18th and 19th century thought, as represented in treatments by such thinkers as Shaftesbury, Hutcheson, Hume, Burke, Kant, Schiller, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Hanslick, and Santayana.
“By the beginning of the 20th century, Beauty was in decline as a subject of philosophical inquiry, and also as a primary goal of the arts. However, there were signs of revived interest by the early 21st Century. [BEAUTY First published Tue Sep 4, 2012; substantive revision Wed Oct 5, 2016 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]
Scientific American published a special ‘report , ‘The Science of Beauty’, May 8, 2009. “Just in time for Mother's Day: From Mother Nature's timeless skin remedies to the latest findings in anti-aging research, science helps to explain how Beauty treatments work and whether they're safe. Other reports featured were about wrinkles, nails, cellulite, lipstick, sunburn, gray hair, wrinkle treatment with babies’ foreskins (you read that correctly), and many additional Beauty tips.
Obliviously Beauty in the Western World focuses on appearances. Superficial Beauty is extremely important in certain societies. But Superficial Beauty misses the mark of this report. This report is about a deeper, analyticalBeauty.
“Some linguists (and philosophers) are envious of the science of physics. Some linguists (and philosophers) love showing off to other practitioners the so-called humanities how they can make their field an empirical natural science that uses the hypothetical-deductive method.
“But, at the same time, linguists (and philosophers) know that the Beauty in linguistics (and philosophy) is very different from the Beauty in physics, chemistry and biology" which are supported by evidence based, provable facts.
“Our linguistic (and philosophical) objects of study and research are much more elusive and abstract, the proofs of their existence are more convoluted, and our capacity for observation and measurement is (even) more limited and indirect than, in the so-called hard sciences.
“One of the deficiencies of our linguistics (and philosophy), when placed before the mirror of physics, is that our theories are not formulated mathematically with equations. Maybe that’s why Ernst Rutherford said that science was either physics or collecting stamps." [An equation for Plato’s problem by José-Luis Mendívil Sin categoría 9 Nov, 2018, Philosophy of linguists]
The main differences between the Beauty of sciences and Beauty of organized religious philosophies are the following:
- Science involves objective, evidence-based facts and measures. Religion encompasses subjective traditions passed anecdotally, verbally or in writing from one individual or minister to another or group.
- Science involves the natural, physical, chemical, biological, environmental and experimental. Religion concerns the supernatural, mystical and unrealistic.
- Science is an accessible, investigational and evolving discipline. Religion is nonnegotiable, permanent belief system.
Explanation by Ernst Rutherford, “That which is not measurable is not science. That which is not physics is stamp collecting. Physics is the only real science. The rest are just stamp collecting.”
SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANS
'SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANS' research journalist, mbmsrmd, Dr. Micheal B. Minix, Sr., M.D., F.I.C.S. was raised in the Methodist Church, reads and studies the King James version of the Holy Bible, belongs to a traditional church, reads and views traditional sermons, prays frequently and is a SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIAN, who tempers the traditional with compelling, credible scientific evidence and facts. Please review The SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANS Website https://myscientistgod.us/
SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANS promote the worship of God, alone, and praises Jesus for teaching Humans how to worship God and strongly advocates prayer.
SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANS declare Beauty is as Beauty does. SLC declare Beauty is a "freely coordinated whole, a classic composition, of the living and Eternal parts; a Supersymmetric stepladder between the material and the spiritual domains.
- SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANS assert Beauty is a composition of the philosophy and benevolence of Jesus' Faith, Hope and Love
- and a composite Beauty, which includes a composition of God's Blessings, Grace and Mercy
- and a composite Beauty, which contains the continued results of worship, obedience and righteousness in the heart and Soul of the beholder;
- a composite Beauty of the holder and beholder's manifestations
- SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANS also promote the coordinated composite Beauty of Universe's 'Interconnectedness', Einstein Relativity, Quantum Entanglement and Supersymmetry which, in whole, are Spiritually Beautiful.
SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANS can easily blend their traditional church membership and philosophy with their SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE CHRISTIANITY, bestowing the best of both reasonable, rational and natural events, history and languages.
- In the following publication from 'Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy '(Winter 2017 Edition) only the following is pertinent and applicable to this website.
- Objectivity and Subjectivity: "Perhaps the most familiar basic issue in the theory of Beauty is whether Beauty
- is subjective, located ‘in the eye of the beholder’
- or whether it is an objective feature of spiritual and religious beauty
"Ancient and medieval accounts for the most part located Beauty outside human's particular experiences. Nevertheless, that Beauty was subjective from the time of the sophists.
- By the 18th century, Hume concluded expressing one ‘species of his philosophy’:
- Beauty is no quality in things themselves:
- It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them;
- and each mind perceives a different Beauty.
- One person may even perceive deformity, where another is sensible of Beauty;
- and every individual ought to acquiesce in his own sentiment, without pretending to regulate those of others. (Hume 1757, 136)
"And Kant launches his discussion of the matter of Beauty in The Critique of Judgment (the Third Critique) at least as emphatically:
- The judgment of taste is therefore not a judgment of cognition,
- and is consequently not logical but aesthetical,
- by which we understand that whose determining measures can be no other than subjective. (Kant 1790, section 1)
"However, if Beauty is entirely subjective, that is, if anything that anyone holds to be or experiences as Beautiful is Beautiful (as James Kirwan, for example, asserts), then it seems that the word has no meaning, or that we are not communicating anything when we call something Beautiful except perhaps an approving personal attitude.
"On the other hand, it seems senseless to say that Beauty has no connection to subjective response or that it is entirely objective. That would seem to entail, for example, that a world with no perceivers could be Beautiful or ugly, or perhaps that Beauty could be detected by scientific instruments. Even if it could be, Beauty would seem to be connected to subjective response, and though we may argue about whether something is Beautiful, the idea that one's experiences of Beauty might be disqualified as simply inaccurate or false might arouse puzzlement as well as hostility. We often regard other people's taste, even when it differs from our own, as provisionally entitled to some respect, as we may not, for example, in cases of moral, political, or factual opinions. All plausible accounts of Beauty connect it to a pleasurable or profound or loving response, even if they do not locate Beauty purely in the eye of the beholder.
"Until the 18th century, most philosophical accounts of Beauty treated it as an objective quality: they located it in the Beautiful object itself or in the qualities of that object: De Veritate Religione, (Augustine, 247), Plato Symposium , Plotinus Enneads.
“We hold that all the Loveliness of this world comes by communion in Ideal-Form. All shapelessness whose kind admits of pattern and form, as long as it remains outside of Reason and Idea, is ugly from that very isolation from the Divine-Thought. And this is the Absolute Ugly: an ugly thing is something that has not been entirely mastered by pattern, that is by Reason, the Matter not yielding at all points and in all respects to Ideal-Form.
"Though Plato and Aristotle disagree on what Beauty is, they both regard it as objective in the sense that it is not localized in the response of the beholder. The classical conception treats Beauty as a matter of instantiating definite proportions or relations among parts, sometimes expressed in mathematical ratios, for example the ‘golden section.’ The sculpture known as ‘The Canon,’ by Polykleitos (fifth/fourth century BCE), was held up as a model of harmonious proportion to be emulated by students and masters alike: Beauty could be reliably achieved by reproducing its objective proportions. Nevertheless, it is conventional in ancient treatments of the topic also to pay tribute to the pleasures of beauty, often described in quite ecstatic terms, as in Plotinus: “This is the spirit that Beauty must ever induce: wonderment and a delicious trouble, longing and love and a trembling that is all delight” (Plotinus 23, [Ennead 1, 3]).
"Nevertheless, eighteenth-century philosophers such as Hume and Kant perceived that something important was lost when Beauty was treated merely as a subjective state. They saw, for example, that controversies often arise about the Beauty of particular things, such as works of art and literature, and that in such controversies, reasons can sometimes be given and will sometimes be found convincing. They saw, as well, that if Beauty is completely relative to individual experiencers, it ceases to be a paramount value, or even recognizable as a value at all across persons or societies.
"It is worth saying that Santayana's treatment of the topic in The Sense of Beauty (1896) was the last major account offered in English for some time, possibly because, once Beauty has been admitted to be entirely subjective, much less when it is held to rest on a sort of mistake, there seems little more to be said. What stuck from Hume's and Kant's treatments was the subjectivity, not the heroic attempts to temper it. If Beauty is a subjective pleasure, it would seem to have no higher status than anything that entertains, amuses, or distracts; it seems odd or ridiculous to regard Beauty as being comparable in importance to truth or justice, for example. And the 20th century also abandoned Beauty as the dominant goal of the arts, again possibly in part because its trivialization in theory led artists to believe that they ought to pursue more real and more serious projects. This decline is explored eloquently in Arthur Danto's book The Abuse of Beauty (2003).
"However, there has been a revival of interest in Beauty in both art and philosophy in recent years, and several theorists have made new attempts to address the antinomy of taste. To some extent, such approaches echo G.E. Moore's: “To say that a thing is beautiful is to say, not indeed that it is itself good, but that it is a necessary element in something which is: to prove that a thing is truly beautiful is to prove that a whole, to which it bears a particular relation as a part, is truly good” (Moore 1903, 201). One interpretation of this would be that what is fundamentally valuable is the situation in which the object and the person experiencing are both embedded; the value of beauty might include both features of the beautiful object and the pleasures of the experiencer.
"Aesthetic judgment never commands universal agreement, and neither a Beautiful object nor a work of art ever engages a catholic community. Beauty creates smaller societies, no less important or serious because they are partial, and, from the point of view of its members, each one is orthodox—orthodox, however, without thinking of all others as heresies. … What is involved is less a matter of understanding and more a matter of hope, of establishing a community that centers around it—a community, to be sure, whose boundaries are constantly shifting and whose edges are never stable. (Nehamas 2007, 80–81)
"Beauty, we might say, or artistic beauty at any rate, is a route from the sensuous and particular to the Absolute and to freedom, from finitude to the infinite, formulations that—while they are influenced by Schiller—strikingly recall Shaftesbury, Plotinus, and Plato.
Subjective Beauty described by the philosphers aforementined is contrasted in the conclusion of this report, with a deeper, analytical Beauty.
Yes, Beauty is in the heart and soul of both the holder and beholder.
Human beings are instructed to worship the LORD our God in the Beauty of His Holiness: [Psa 96:9]. Aesthetic Beauty, like flowers in Fall fade and wither, but the Beautiful Word of our God endures forever. [Isaiah 40:8]
We are instructed to praise truth, righteousness, purity, and whatever else is lovely, admirable and beautiful in the eyes of God; all things excellent and praiseworthy, human beings are directed to contemplate such things. [Philippians 4:8]
Our LORD does not consider human appearance and the things people look at. Other humans’ outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the human heart.” [1 Samuel 16:7]
Our God has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the human heart and soul; yet what God has done from beginning to end often remains unknown, not learned and not applied. [Ecclesiastes 3:11]
Anyone who listens to the Word but does not properly adorn-it, is like a superficial someone, who looks for their non-existent Beauty in a mirror. [James 1:23]
So, by the Word of God through Jesus, all of us are God’s children through belief, faith, obedience and the practice of righteousness. All of us, who are baptized in the name of God, the Word and Holy Spirit are outwardly clothed and adorned and inwardly redeemed, restored and whole-souled with the Beauty of God. [Galatians 3:26-27]
Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but human beings who fear the LORD are to be praised. [Proverbs 31:30]
Good looks, athleticism and bestowments fade, but practicing belief, the Word, spirituality and righteousness last a lifetime. Humans inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, is of which is of great worth in God's sight.
[ https://dailyverses.net/beauty, 11 Bible Verses about Beauty] [What Does the Bible Say About Beauty?, https://www.openbible.info/topics/beauty]
In Conclusion, the Mindfulness Beauty of Christianity, Spirituality and other Religions is in the Heart and Soul of the holder and beholder. Christian, Spiritual and other Religions' Beauty are....as humans Do the Beauty of their faith, hope and love. Beauty is as Beauty Does.
Bibliography
- Aquinas, Thomas, Summa Theologica, Fathers of the English Dominican Province, trans., London: Christian Classics, 1981 [13th century text].
- Augustine, Earlier Writings, J.H. Burleigh, ed., New York: WJK Publishing, 1953 [4th/5th century AD text].
- Aristotle, The Complete Works of Aristotle, in two volumes, Jonathan Barnes, ed., Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984 [4th century BCE text].
- Ayer, A.J., 1952, Language, Truth, and Logic, New York: Dover.
- Bell, Clive, 1914, Art, London: Chatto & Windus.
- Berkeley, Bishop George, 1732, Alciphron: or, The Minute Philosopher, London: Tonson and Co.
- Bullough, Edward, 1912. “‘Psychical Distance’ as a Factor in Art and as an Aesthetic Principle,” British Journal of Psychology, 5. Widely anthologized, e.g., in Cahn, Steven and Meskin, Aaron, 2008. Aesthetics: A Comprehensive Anthology, Malden, MA: Blackwell.
- Burke, Edmund, 1757, A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
- Carritt, E.F., 1931, Philosophies of Beauty, London: Oxford University Press.
- Coomaraswamy, Ananda, 1977, Traditional Art and Symbolism (Selected Papers, volume 1), Princeton: Bollingen.
- Croce, Benedetto, 1928, “Aesthetica in Nunc,” in Philosophy, Poetry, History, Cecil Sprigge, trans., London: Oxford University Press, 1966.
- Danto, Arthur, 2003, The Abuse of Beauty, Chicago: Open Court.
- Diogenes Laertius, The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, C.D. Yonge trans., New York: George Bell & Sons, 1895 [3rd century CE text].
- Eco, Umberto, 1959, Art and Beauty in the Middle Ages, Hugh Bredin, trans., New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986.
- Hanslick, Eduard, 1891, The Beautiful in Music, Gustav Cohen, trans., London: Novello and Company.
- Hegel, G.W.F., 1835, Hegel's Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, in two volumes, T.M. Knox, trans., Oxford: Clarendon, 1975.
- Hume, David, 1757, “Of the Standard of Taste,” Essays Moral and Political, London: George Routledge and Sons, 1894.
- –––, 1740, A Treatise of Human Nature, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.
- Hutcheson, Francis, 1725, An Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2004.
- Kant, Immanuel, 1790, Critique of Judgement, J.H. Bernard, trans., New York: Macmillan, 1951.
- Kirwan, James, 1999. Beauty, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
- Moore, G.E., 1903, Principia Ethica, Mineola, NY: Dover, 2004.
- Mothersill, Mary, 1984, Beauty Restored, Oxford: Clarendon.
- Nehamas, Alexander, 2007, Only a Promise of Happiness: The Place of Beauty in a World of Art, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Plato, Collected Dialogues, Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns, eds., Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961 [4th century BCE text].
- Plotinus, The Six Enneads, Stephen McKenna and B.S. Page, trans., Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica Publishing, 1952 [3rd century CE text].
- Pollitt, J.J., 1974, The Ancient View of Greek Art, New Haven: Yale University Press.
- Pseudo-Dionysius, Works of Dionysius the Areopagite, John Parker, trans., London: James Parker and Co., 1897 [originally 5th or 6th century CE].
- Santayana, George, 1896, The Sense of Beauty, New York: Scribner's.
- Sappho, The Poetry of Sappho, Jim Powell, trans., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007 [7th or 6th century BCE text].
- Sartwell, Crispin, 2004, Six Names of Beauty, New York: Routledge
- Schiller, Friedrich, 1795, On the Aesthetic Education of Man, New York: Dover, 2004.
- Schopenhauer, Arthur, 1818, The World as Will and Idea, E.F.J. Payne, trans., New York: Dover, 1966.
- Scruton, Roger, 2009, Beauty, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
- Shaftesbury, Third Earl of, 1738, “The Moralists, a Philosophical Rhapsody, “ Characteristicks of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times, Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2001.
- Vitruvius, On Architecture, Frank Granger, trans., Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970 [originally 1st century BCE].
- Wölfflin, Heinrich, 1932, Principles of Art History, M.D. Hottinger, trans., New York: Dover, 1950.
- Xenophon, Memorabilia, E. C. Marchant, trans., Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1923 [4th century BCE text].
- [Sartwell, Crispin, "Beauty", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/beauty/>.]
