Is Beauty Truth?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

sometime sun
 
Reply Wed 11 Nov, 2009 05:13 pm
@prothero,
prothero;102715 wrote:
It seems to me that there are works of art, music and literature which transcend time, culture and personal taste.
Likewise it seems to me that "the notion of truth" and "the goodness of its possession" transcends the pragmatic concept of truth as correspondence.
I am a believer in transcendent values, but then I am a theist as well, and a rationalist not an empiricist.
So for me beauty is a form of truth, and its possession a form of value.


Please decribe this 'transcendent value' you have spoken of.
Make art to share so as to convince your truth.

---------- Post added 11-11-2009 at 11:28 PM ----------

hue-man;102804 wrote:
My disagreement is with the notion that it is true that something is beautiful. The only truth to be found in this notion is the fact that people value beauty, but that says nothing about the thing in itself being objectively beautiful.


Value as beauty.
Value as truth.
So truth must be earned?
I something given freely less valuable therefore less truthful?
Is something commandable more truthful?
Truth comes with cost?
Truth must be able to be quantified, qualified, quarentined to make reality of objectivity, objectifiable, objectivism?

---------- Post added 11-11-2009 at 11:31 PM ----------

Zetherin;102807 wrote:
But truth does not have anything necessarily to do with objectivity.

If prothero states, "Michelangelo created some beautiful sculptures", I may say, "That's true, his work is some of the best", or I may say "I don't think that's true, his work was rather uneasy on the eyes". Though, we are speaking of subjective evaluations, we can still speak of what's true or false.

We claim many things are true in colloquial speak daily, and many of them do not have anything to do with things you'd interpret as objective. Not everything true has to have ontological properties, if that's what you're referring to. Definitions of words can be true or false (it's false that the definition of "cat" is, "A piece of furniture consisting of a seat, legs, back, and often arms that people sit in"), premises in deductive arguments can be true or false (unsound: all cats are made of aluminum), someone being funny could be true or false (George Carlin is truly funny), mathematical equations could be true or false (1+1=2 is true), and none of these things, I think, would fit into your "objectivity" notion.

It's important you clarify what it is you mean by "truth", lest you begin arguing with someone over nothing. And that's what, I feel, this would turn into. It would be a semantic issue over "truth".


A good example of truth.
Is it a truth, or is it the truth?

---------- Post added 11-11-2009 at 11:36 PM ----------

kennethamy;102813 wrote:
John Keat's poem "Ode on a Grecian Urn" (1819) contains the famous line, ' "Beauty is truth, truth beauty," -that is all. Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know'. Keats, like his fellow poet and friend, Shelley, were Platonists. (See Shelley's "Hymn to Intellectual Beauty"). The "Ode" is a very Platonistic poem.Plato held that all the Forms (Ideas) were really one and the same, and so, the two Forms, truth and beauty were identical with one another. And this is what is expressed by Keat's line. Outside of this context, the notion that beauty and truth are one and the same makes little if any sense.


Must truth make sense?
Does it have anything to do with the senses?
Is not by being a form of truth?
Believing not necessarily in the being.
 
Fido
 
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 12:05 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;103056 wrote:
Without our observing and analyzing, the rock just is.

We are the ones with the semantic capacity to assign the rock to be "true" or "meaningful".

But, I sort of see what you mean. Sure, the rock would be "truth", I guess.

Nothing is only semantically true... Truth is an essential quality in our reality... The more truth we have the better we live, but at the end, truth is essential to the keeping of our lives, and life is beautiful...
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Thu 26 Nov, 2009 01:01 am
@sometime sun,
In one sense Beauty is Truth. I think that the only proof is persuasion, and that persuasion works by means of Beauty.

In another sense, "Beauty" and "Truth" are words with certain uses that are not (in ordinary conversation) interchangeable.

John Keats is great.
 
Fido
 
Reply Thu 26 Nov, 2009 05:29 am
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;106033 wrote:
In one sense Beauty is Truth. I think that the only proof is persuasion, and that persuasion works by means of Beauty.

In another sense, "Beauty" and "Truth" are words with certain uses that are not (in ordinary conversation) interchangeable.

John Keats is great.

I think that in a democracy the only legitimate force we can use against our fellows is influence, and beauty has a part in that no less than truth...

What we may have to do is put beauty and truth through a syllogism, which is the beginning of logic, and hardly infalible... If truth is essential to life we may well say that truth is beauty because life is all meaning... Yet we can say that not all we find beautiful is truth as much as not all that glitters is gold... We are inclind toward a certain aesthetic sense of the beautiful which is culturally determined, or perhaps instinctive, but generally we see the ugly truth as beauty because knowledge is essential to survival...
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Thu 26 Nov, 2009 04:58 pm
@Fido,
For me, Hegel's system is beautiful, including the parts of it I don't agree with. For instance, I don't think he attained Absolute Knowledge. But I find it beautiful that his system implies such a closure (not unlike that of Finnegans Wake). An immanent circular theology (which is his system an anthropology, for man is "God".), a dynamic Spinozism. I think it can and should be experienced and enjoyed as conceptual art, as a thing of beauty (which is a joy forever...).

For me Philosophy is Art, as well as a Science. It also scratches the religious itch. For me, that is. An ironist is not incapable of mystical feelings.
 
Fido
 
Reply Fri 27 Nov, 2009 06:25 am
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;106159 wrote:
For me, Hegel's system is beautiful, including the parts of it I don't agree with. For instance, I don't think he attained Absolute Knowledge. But I find it beautiful that his system implies such a closure (not unlike that of Finnegans Wake). An immanent circular theology (which is his system an anthropology, for man is "God".), a dynamic Spinozism. I think it can and should be experienced and enjoyed as conceptual art, as a thing of beauty (which is a joy forever...).

For me Philosophy is Art, as well as a Science. It also scratches the religious itch. For me, that is. An ironist is not incapable of mystical feelings.

I used to read a lot of Marx and think much of dialectical materialism...I just cannot see that it works... Humanity seems to have only one door into the future, and it is into the past...The American and English revolutions were attempt to re-establish the old constitution, and the French and Russian Revolutions were attampt to recapture an even older ideal past... Today with capitalism crumbling and with our government clearly unable to reach the goals for which it was established people are, as Obamaman noted, Clinging to their guns and religion, which on the one hand is democratic, but on the other is a primitive form... The fear of the future is universal with people, and they can only be coaxed into it through the back door... Death seems to wait in the future, and all our forms are designed to stop time where our situation is as we like it... But, only dead people live in the past, and the failed forms of the past cannot simply be reformed... And in the attempt to avoid the inevitable, which is true change to a new form of relationship, people try to escape a miserable present into an ideal past only to find a more terrible future...People should look at what is going on, and the dialectic does not explain all... All human progress involves a change of forms because what we are, and our basic needs cannot change...If a person moves out of a tent into a house it is a change of forms... To build a house having only the model of a tent requires an understanding of the form, and it is out of an understanding of natural forms that people recreate their reality better than natural reality...
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Fri 27 Nov, 2009 05:06 pm
@sometime sun,
Politics is a rough terrain. If we are going to apply the beauty/truth question to politics, I suppose I can mention that I don't think man is interested in the truth as an end, but only as a means. Man is an emotional aesthetic creature who thinks critically only when motivated by an aesthetic/emotional purpose. The philosopher is a mask that some men choose in order to play the hero. It's one more costume for the great stage of the world. It's one more costume for the mirror.

Truth is a cowboy hat.
 
Fido
 
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 11:49 am
@sometime sun,
In politics truth is beauty, but a good lie is priceless... People will sell a whole truck load of beauty to buy a pocket full of power...Government thinks they can corner the market on truth and run up the price, but all they do is inflate the value of a good guess...

---------- Post added 11-28-2009 at 12:51 PM ----------

Reconstructo;106469 wrote:
Politics is a rough terrain. If we are going to apply the beauty/truth question to politics, I suppose I can mention that I don't think man is interested in the truth as an end, but only as a means. Man is an emotional aesthetic creature who thinks critically only when motivated by an aesthetic/emotional purpose. The philosopher is a mask that some men choose in order to play the hero. It's one more costume for the great stage of the world. It's one more costume for the mirror.

Truth is a cowboy hat.

Truth is a condom... It saves many a mistake...
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 05:34 pm
@Fido,
I enjoyed your last post.

Why do humans seek power? It's a complex question. Do they see themselves as more beautiful, if more powerful? (The aesthetics of status..)

Of course power is also wealth, and wealth provides a beautiful environment. The homeless are far away. The indoor pool is sparkling. Food presentation becomes important as its nutrition is assured (if such is chosen).

One could argue that one sort of beauty is traded for another. One could reduce all ethics to aesthetics. But that is offered playfully.

I certainly think we need both words (truth and beauty). Both mean very different things in different sentences.
 
salima
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 02:13 am
@sometime sun,
sometime-
some random thoughts on the subject...
there are things, people, music that I find exquisitely beautiful and other people detest. am I wrong? are they wrong? consensus has nothing to do with truth.
is water not more beautiful than diamonds to a person dying of thirst? yet previously in his life he may have thought diamonds were the most beautiful substance in the world.
truth is better applied to those things which are not subject to interpretation, such as mathematics. mathematics are a truth of a sort.
but beauty is only created by the person who perceives. an artist is not great because he creates beautiful things-he is great because he causes others to perceive something more than the atoms that compose his work. beauty is truth only to the person who is perceiving it.
mathematics can also be beautiful. neither is more valuable than the other as far as I can tell, but I think I would rather live without mathematics than without beauty.
but Truth is something we cannot see from here. maybe there is a Beauty also that we cannot see from here, I never thought about it before...but there is enough beauty and enough truth here for me, it suits the world we live in I think.
 
William
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 05:56 am
@sometime sun,
Beauty is woman and the love of woman, and all she is and that's it. We use the term ambiguously when there are more appropriate terms that should be applied to such a point that the word beauty like the word love gets buried and there is confusion. If you will note even on this forum beauty and love are rarely used which indicates a less than obvious knowledge as to when to use them.

When we observe a work of art it is a fine work of art; not a beautiful work of art. I don't love a work of art, I admire the craftsmanship and the talent that went into it. Beauty is a thing of desire and there is only one-woman. She is the object of man's affections, period and what is the sole desire that man should desire. Nothing else should man desire, ha, and she knows it to, innately, whether she is aware she knows it or not.

For instance when we observe a natural, untouched panoramic landscape we might say "what a beautiful sight"! It is not a beautiful sight; it might be breathtaking or awesome, but beautiful...........no. That term is reserved for woman and woman only. When a man restricts his use of it to that end only, then we might get some idea of the appreciation and love that only a woman can bestow on that man. The relationship between man and woman is the universal paradigm that is true of all things that we think are true; without understanding that and affecting it and man realizing his emptiness without it is what causes all the confusion. Just like the song I brought to this forum by "Celtic Woman" entitled "The Voice". In that song is a phrase that literally made me well up with emotion and those were, "..bring me your peace and my wounds, they will heal"! She was talking to man and his warlike autonomous nature that can be understood if woman is not considered in all that is that relationship between the two. If we devote more of our attentions to woman we would not have the time to think of war.

Every thing man does is for woman, or should be. He will fight for that which will be the land that will be her home and all she needs that will bring her peace and serenity and joy to do the one thing that brings life to us all. She is the portal of life and without her there is no life.

If there is one thing that man should worship it is woman for what she offers to our being here in the first place. Yet it does take "two to tango" and it is her beauty that gets the ball rolling; her attraction to man. Is it hard to explain? Yes when we use the word in so many other contexts. Even that life that is of man of his making, desires her and what she offers. The sperm and the Egg. That little critter has but one attraction, and his one purpose is to win that race. Ha!

It can also be understood why man refers to God as a He. Man is life for it is he and what he offers that brings that egg in woman to life. In the same respect we can also conclude why we refer to the Earth as a she and the heavens God. That is the only thing we know that is a universal truth for sure. The MAN/WOMAN/CHILD paradigm. The balance that it represents the heavens and the earth and the continuance of that what we call humanity. There is no other way we can continue.

With out further adieu, it is my suggestion to all the men out there please reserve your use of the word "beauty" to only that of woman. Find another term to use when you think something is pleasing for the eye to behold. Beauty belongs to woman and to woman alone. Once man begins to understand that and bring peace to this Earth that is her domain will there truly be peace on Earth.

William
 
salima
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 07:11 am
@sometime sun,
sorry william, but there are some really beautiful men in the world...and i still contend that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. i am not talking about the way someone says 'beautiful!' when they see a cell phone.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 08:08 am
@salima,
salima;111485 wrote:
sorry william, but there are some really beautiful men in the world...



Ahem! Thank you, salima, for noticing.
 
William
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 08:17 am
@sometime sun,
Yes, Salima I can understand a woman saying that but coming from a man I think the opposite. Those beautiful men also like ofher beautiful men too. I think you know some good men but to say they are beautiful, I can't agree. Sorry. A man who does respond to a comment to his beauty would cause me to wonder? Precisely what I mean to the overuse of the term as to what beauty is all about. I am not talking about the physical beauty that is woman. It goes to much more than that. Can we see in in today's society? Yes, there are some women that carry a feminine bloom about them that is hard to describe. It has to do wiith a warmth and a caring that we are losing in this world. I have a niece that has it, Audrey Hepburn had it, All young girls have it until they lose it and become cold hard and calculating not of any reason of their own but to outside influence that causes then to do so.

I am of the type that wishes to put women on pedestals and will do all in my power to protect,comfort and care for them; and for the woman I love, I will surely die for her. Have I met such a woman. Not in this life time, but she is there. Perhaps I have and our time has not yet come to be re-united. One day it will happen. I am confident of that fact.

I understand what you are saying Sal, and most women do see what they say is beautiful because beauty is slowly ebbing away and we apply that word to things that can best be described in other words and reserve that word where it will truly have the most impact and where it truly belongs and only man can use it in that context and only when he is observing a woman should he. If a man regards another man as beautiful, I care not to reply to that. It is so foreign to me, I cannot fathom it.

So please if you chance to meet another "good man" please use another term that will offer your feelings. Him being beautiful is not the appropriate one. I have seen "pretty boys" and I care not to even be around them if you know what I men. There are reasons why they are the way they are and we have discussed that but those threads always end in flames and don't care to have this one to end in such a manner.

I am rather adamant in my feelings as to beauty and will leave it here.

Thanks for your comment,
William
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 08:21 am
@sometime sun,
Beauty is, but money means...
 
salima
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 08:57 am
@sometime sun,
i wasnt talking about eye candy...though that is also nice. no, i meant some men are truly beautiful from the inside out-as one might say a saint is beautiful. i understand a man would be upset to have a woman think he was beautiful if he thought of beauty as a feminine aspect, but i dont believe beauty has any gender. i dont believe it is confined to physical creatures or objects either.

the sky can be so beautiful it takes my breath away. there was one day i remember so well when the water hadnt come for four days and so many cities around us hadnt had any for months until even the wells were dry, and then the city sent us water...it was making a noise like music, falling from the pipes into the underground tanks and coming out of the hose and sparkling in the sun more beautiful than anything i had ever seen before...i was looking through it like it was crystal, and all the world was beautiful...

and i remember when my mother-in-law was combing her oldest son's hair-he was 50 at the time and very close to death from cancer. the sight of it was of course sad but there was something incredibly beautiful about the human spirit shining through, especially about motherhood and the joy and pain that can be suffered through one's children. the heights and depths of feeling that a human being can reach...i find that as well as awe inspiring...really beautiful.

ok, i will stop now...i guess somehow i started to think there is a lot of beauty in the world, after growing up thinking everything was ugly. funny how life changes us.

but i dont see it connected to truth at all...in fact i dont care much for truth, since it is always relative. only absolute truth is Truth and we cant know that. but beauty on the other hand-the kind i have found which i am referring to in this post, is not the kind that can be measured as to which is more or less beautiful. any of the experiences that i have related i could not possibly rate...i could only say that was beauty...

i guess what i have said is that beauty is a subjective experience...
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:03 am
@salima,
salima;111505 wrote:
i wasnt talking about eye candy...though that is also nice.


Disappointed. ............
 
salima
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:21 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;111507 wrote:
Disappointed. ............


but kenneth i have come to see the inner beauty in you, and that is eternal.
Smile
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 11:10 am
@salima,
salima;111513 wrote:
but kenneth i have come to see the inner beauty in you, and that is eternal.
Smile


SULK!....................
 
salima
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 06:46 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;111529 wrote:
SULK!....................


Laughing
hey, i dont have a picture of you, who is to say i wouldnt think you were as beautiful as my handsome fruit vendors and auto-wallahs?
 
 

 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/13/2020 at 06:39:02