AA: >>I also never said beauty was a social construct, meaningful or otherwise<< Beauty is not a social construct. The reasons we tell ourselves why we find something to be beautiful, they are social constructs. And the reasons we tell ourselves why our reasons are of superior value to others' reasons, those, too, are social constructs. I don't know what 'beauty' is besides a word that like many other BIG WORDS such as the good, truth, justice, freedom and pornography mean different things to different people at different times. There is beauty in this world. We all celebrate it. It keeps us going. But what you find beautiful depends on who you are. As far as I know pink wall paper with sea shells might well be able to transport people who dig that stuff into experiences of the Sublime that can embarrass any of mine. And that's what the whole show is about, isn't it? Mike Geary Memphis ----- Original Message ----- From: Andy Amago To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 9:59 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Beauty, anyone? I never said that something subjective is meaningless. I said that beauty is so subjective as to be meaningless. If one person thinks a cup of mud is ugly while another thinks it's sublimely beautiful, each subjective experience is valid, but it says absolutely nothing about beauty. In fact, it renders the word beauty meaningless. . Beauty is meaningless not because it is or isn't a social construct but because it can't be defined, because it's anything anyone thinks it is. Society may tell us that a McMansion is beautiful, but an environmentalist might see an ugly waste of earth's resources, and a sensible person might see a prison of debt; in either case, no beauty at all. Or someone might think the fountains in Las Vegas are beautiful, while someone else might think they're a profligate waste of water in a dessert. Or one person can be struck by the golden red sunset on a beach while another is reminded of being mugged on the beach. And on and on. The same object, vastly different reactions. Therefore, beauty by definition must be in the eye of the beholder and nowhere else. If that's hyperthyroidism, sorry, hyperindividualism, so be it. Gee, that was beautiful. Don't you think so John? . -----Original Message----- From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx Sent: Feb 20, 2007 7:53 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Beauty, anyone? How does something being subjective render it meaningless? Julie Krueger ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html