Beauty as defined by wikipedia ( obviously not the most reputable of sources)is as follows : "Beauty is a characteristic of a person, animal , place, object, or idea that provides a perceptual experience of pleasure, meaning or satisfaction."
This definition seems to eliminate the physical aspects of "materialistic" beauty, but I still find opaque nooks and crannies.
This conversation is, again admittedly, over my head, but I'm doing my best to stay afloat and shout out ideas, but I fear with my shouting I've ingested to much water from this ocean of ideology and I'm going to be sick. Beauty is something I believe is meant to be universal; rather I feel most people want it to be universal or are looking for there to be an agreed upon definition. Taken at a glance beauty may seem to have a singular definition. This definition being something to do with face value or physical appearance. This "shallow" definition is overshadowed when you peer at beauty. After taking this longer look at beauty you realize one person's definition of beauty is most likely significantly different than another's and that extends to members of the same culture. If you cross culturally compare definitions of beauty you quickly arrive at the unsolvable puzzle that is universally defining a word as complicated as beauty. How can one person's definition of beauty be more valuable, more correct, or even more applicable than another persons definition? Why are people so interested and invested in defining and or discovering what beauty actually is?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment