Ethics seeks to address questions about morality (right and wrong acts). Many, if not all, moral theories deal with the attainment of happiness, which is usually described as the presence of pleasure, the absence of pain and the sense of joy and contentment.

Aesthetics deals with the nature of beauty, art and taste. More importantly, aesthetics deals with sensory emotional values such as pleasure and pain. This seems to mean that ethical values ultimately reduce to aesthetic values (pleasure, pain, joy, happiness and suffering). In fact, this seems to mean that all of the axiological fields, such as political philosophy, philosophy of law and economic philosophy are ultimately dependent on aesthetic values.

Thoughts?

Ethics seeks to address questions about morality (right and wrong acts). Many, if not all, moral theories deal with the attainment of happiness, which is usually described as the presence of pleasure, the absence of pain and the sense of joy and contentment.

Aesthetics deals with the nature of beauty, art and taste. More importantly, aesthetics deals with sensory emotional values such as pleasure and pain. This seems to mean that ethical values ultimately reduce to aesthetic values (pleasure, pain, joy, happiness and suffering). In fact, this seems to mean that all of the axiological fields, such as political philosophy, philosophy of law and economic philosophy are ultimately dependent on aesthetic values.

Thoughts?

Some of the things you have outlined here, are questionable if they even really consider ethics as a foundation for them. Like the philosophy of politics. I know I have said it a dozen times, but I honestly don't think politicians actually consider the ramifications as far as ethics go when proposing political policies. I know that sounds rather harsh and even a bit irrational but I feel that a majority only take as the basis, wealth gain for themselves or their political affiliation then it trickles down from there, but rarely is ethics ever considered. I think if there was more ethics in politics we would have a (understated) massively improved society.

Uhg, long explanation and too much focus on just one aspect of your argument. Well anyways my point being that if ethics and aesthetics come together at all, it would first be led by ethics. However; it also depends on the system itself because I could see in certain cases where aesthetics dominates over the ethical decisions.

But the way I look at it, aesthetics won't kill anyone or have anyone killed but ethics will.

Your characterization of ethics is a bit off, as Kant, who is quite influential in ethics, did not hold such a view.

But putting that aside, I believe that normally, if a "reduction" is made, it is thought that ethics is primary, not aesthetics. But it is most common to keep them as separate ideas, because it is commonly thought that what is beautiful and what is good are not the same things.

Ethics seeks to address questions about morality (right and wrong acts). Many, if not all, moral theories deal with the attainment of happiness, which is usually described as the presence of pleasure, the absence of pain and the sense of joy and contentment.

Aesthetics deals with the nature of beauty, art and taste. More importantly, aesthetics deals with sensory emotional values such as pleasure and pain. This seems to mean that ethical values ultimately reduce to aesthetic values (pleasure, pain, joy, happiness and suffering). In fact, this seems to mean that all of the axiological fields, such as political philosophy, philosophy of law and economic philosophy are ultimately dependent on aesthetic values.

Thoughts?

...
My charaterization of ethics is that it seeks to address questions about morality. I think that that is a very basic definition of the field. How does Kant's (who I rarely agree with) moral philosophy conflict with the definition of ethics as the field which deals with questions of morality?

Aesthetics doesn't just deal with what is beautiful. Aesthetics deals primarily with sensory emotional values such as pleasure and pain, upon which notions of beauty are grounded. Please demonstrate how aesthetics reduces to ethics? Believing that all axiological values should be grounded in ethics and put ethics first is different from all axiological values actually being grounded in ethical notions.

Sure...You are wrong in the way you use the terms since morality and ethics are the same, morals coined by Cicero to translate the sense of ethics into Latin... Other than that, it is more correct to say that Ethics reduces to genetics, because no one can tell one ethnic group what is moral in the defense of their own against another ethnic group... For example, no one can say what the Jews do in defense of Jews, or what the Arabs do in defense of Arabs, however inhumane, is not perefectly moral...Morality is community, and if morality is a problem it is because communities are all fractured, having no true power over their own....

Your characterization of morality included: "Many, if not all, moral theories deal with the attainment of happiness, which is usually described as the presence of pleasure, the absence of pain and the sense of joy and contentment." And Kant is a prominent example of someone who did not regard the attainment of happiness, in itself, as relevant to morality. I might also add that Aristotle's idea of happiness included a good deal more than merely pleasure and the absence of pain. The idea that pleasure and pain are the essence of morality is called "hedonism", and most philosophers have not been hedonists.

Pleasure and pain are more often associated with ethics than aesthetics. If aesthetics can be reduced to pleasure and pain, then it would more often be regarded as reducing aesthetics to ethics rather than the other way around.

Additionally, I have heard people discuss the aesthetic value of boxing, which involves an admiration of the skill of the boxers, which obviously in fact involves a good deal of pain.

Most often, aesthetics is considered to be separate from ethics, but if one is to be reduced to the other, I expect that one would find more philosophers who would reduce aesthetics to ethics rather than the other way around. But we are then discussing a small subset of philosophers.

Ethics is a natural form of relationship...Ethics flows out of the navel, the natal, natural relationships like the family, tribe and nation...It is made real by the emotion behind it...The feeling of love for our own...

And yes, aesthetics is of the same sort of behavior, since our taste is as we are raised...But there is no way to reduce the one to the other...

The answer in short is no, Ethics does not reduce to Aesthetics. You're talking about Morality and Art. If anything Aesthetics relies to some degree on Ethics, as much as Metaphysics and Epistemology. Aesthetics is ultimately a representation of a mans sense of life. If he views life as suffering, values as unatainable, man as unable to deal with the world, this will show through in his work. Ethics guide action, our ethical ideas will tell us how to behave, what is right, wrong and tolerable in any given situation. If a man paints something beautiful it can suggest things about his ethics, you can deduce by what he doesn't include in his painting what it is he finds unacceptable in life. Art being a depiction of essentials (if the artist takes it that way.) The essential parts of a mans art will tell you his world view. If a man paints horrific scenes of murder, you can deduce what his sense of life is rather easily in the same manner.
Under both depictions lies the artists ethics, what he believes is good and bad in the world. At the same time it suggests his view of epistemology, that is, weather or not man can interpret the world and reality or if it is being "viewed through dark glass" as I have heard it said. This will reflect in his art as well. Metaphysics also plays a role, is reality real or is it only a foggy interpretation of the true reality beyond our control to interpret or even deal with. All of this can bee seen in the aesthetic value of a work of art, be it a painting, music, film, dance, etc. I think the greatest example is Avant Garde vs. Romantiscism, in seeing opposite senses of life at work. Studying the artists would also give an idea of the kind of ethics influencing the work.

I'm saying that pleasure and pain are sensori-emotional values, a.k.a aesthetic values, and that ethical values stem from these sensori-emotional values.

Aesthetics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ethics is a natural form of relationship...Ethics flows out of the navel, the natal, natural relationships like the family, tribe and nation...It is made real by the emotion behind it...The feeling of love for our own...

And yes, aesthetics is of the same sort of behavior, since our taste is as we are raised...But there is no way to reduce the one to the other...