Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,or is it?

Please comment on the question-i have to write a term paper on it and have no idea what to say...Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,or is it?
It is in the eyes of the beholder. When we look at something, the thought ';This is beautiful'; arises. If not, the thought ';This is ugly arises. When dealing with the duality of the mind, one must realize that ';What IS'; is always being colored by thoughts. In dual ';thinking';, how could you know beauty without ugly to compare it to?Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,or is it?
I think that beauty has certain criteria to meet, but yes...it's all in individual perception. And I think it does fade with time. Not to say the person or thing becomes LESS beautiful...but that peoples' perception of it diminishes.

Take this example...I went out to Washington State years ago for vacation. Everywhere I went there were mountains, and I...being someone who had never seen them 'up close' and in reality before...was completely awestruck! I just kept stopping to stare and must have taken 100 pictures....I was in my glory! And yet...the people who LIVED there went about their days as though there was nothing special about where they were, and I just couldn't understand that!

I think everyone agrees that mountains are a beautiful thing...but the people who were exposed to them every day in the natural course of their lives somehow got 'used' to seeing them and just didn't even seem to notice them anymore...at least not in the way I did. I think that's what happens with beauty...it can become mundane and everyday to people once the 'novelty' of it wears off. Human beings are very fickle.
Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Yes.

Beauty, according to Webster's, is the quality attributed to whatever pleases or satisfies the senses or mind, be it by line, color, form, texture, proportion, rhythmic motion, tone, etc., or by behavior, attitude, etc. This seems a reasonable definition to me.

An important attribute of beauty is that it is attributed to something only after it has been beheld and perceived as pleasing or satisfying. In other words, were there no beholders, there would be no beauty.

Human experience demonstrates that beholders reach different conclusions as to whether something is beautiful. One person's beautiful music is painful for another to hear. One person finds tall people more attractive, while another is attracted to shorter people. In the end, it is impossible to objectively declare that one thing is beautiful and another not.

The above being said, there are tendencies among subjective beholders to find some things attractive. Music that is generally considered beautiful may not be considered beautiful by everyone, but its general recognition suggests that its attributes tend to please the senses of most listeners. Similarly, certain physical attributes, while not attractive to all, tend to please the senses of most beholders. The analysis suggests that beauty, while not objective, is also not a completely random determination.

Perhaps your paper, in pursuing this point, could investigate why people find certain things beautiful and other things not so beautiful. For example, I have read that people find symmetry generally attractive. This goes beyond the question's words but definitely is on point with respect to its spirit. I wish you luck on your paper.
my boyfriend used to say ';if beauty is only skin deep, then you must have really thick skin.';

well back to your paper. I think that most parents think their kid is the cutest! What about these parents that have obese kids or are physically deformed? They think they're kids are beautiful. Maybe not Supermodel standards, but they do believe their kids are beautiful. So beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Spiders think spiders are neat.

Gaters think gaters , hell, yes it just has to be.
it's like ice cream. i may like one kind and you may like another. but everyone thinks it's sweet.
Of course. If it wasn't, there would be a true, definitive ideal of beauty.
I think so, but I dont like obese women.
if a person likes somebody because they are Witty or just fun to be with and you love them for that .then you begin to see beauty in that person dose that make sense
';Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but ugly is universal';
yes it is
Yes it is ,we do not all see things exactly the same. Some people will look a woman for instance and just see a form. Other will look at the same woman and will see kind smile, or happy eyes...or the beauty within.... good thing huh!
Who is able to define beauty? Is there a ';common universal'; way to describe it? Is beauty subject to ';changes';? Who has created its scale?

There's no such thing as a perfect ';beauty'; definition. Everybody knows what it is but no one is able to describe it! Beauty comes from within and it gets mixed with several emotions and feelings besides being related to certain moments we are living which cam be very specific and which may lead us to find beauty in many different things (or not)!

There are many things which are beautiful to me and which may not be ';that'; beautiful too other people (or not beautiful at all to some others!).

So, everybody knows what it is, everybody has his own sense of beauty but no one is able to measure it. Beauty is definitely unsdescribable, although very much desired! It varies according to our moods, to our ages and to our environments!
More or less those are the words that Thomas Aquinas used to refer that matter.
everything is subjective to the eye of the ';beholder';
Personal perceptions vs. what society labels as beautiful (weight can be discussed) or having a beautiful personality but not so hot looking or vice versa. Ex. hot guys that are jerks end up being ugly to me!

No comments:

Post a Comment