The line between beauty and goodness is undoubtedly blurry. The two are often used in unison, to describe the same thing. For example, a piece of art can be described as both "very good," and "beautiful". The same goes for a job well done or a excellently cooked meal. In some cases, people use "beautiful" and "good" as virtual synonyms. Both beauty and good are always used with a positive connotation and because of this, are assumed by many to have similar meanings. But they're so different.
Although the exact definition of "good" is quite elusive, generally, I consider the good to be what is beneficial not only for the individual, but for those around them. The definition of beauty is, as well, hard to pinpoint. But for the most part, I would say that what is beautiful is what is mentally, visually, spiritually or even culinarily pleasing. This being said, what is beneficial is not necessarily pleasing and vice versa. For the purpose of exemplifying this, I would like to bring up the concept of the Sublime. Sublime things elicit beauty essentially because of their massive, unchangeable, natural presence and power. When looking at a Tsunami from afar, it is easy to see its objective beauty, the beauty stemming from its force and immensity. However, regardless of how visually pleasing a tsunami may be, all the people it will kill and destruction it create cant't possibly be considered good. A bright, fluorescent color created by nuclear waste can objectively be seen as beautiful, however, we all know that it is far from good. A chocolate that you pop in your mouth can taste beautiful, yet be pretty bad in terms of health.
In this sense beauty can be much more superficial than goodness. Beauty is what it pleasing, and determining what it pleasing is often much easier than determining what is good. So many things go into deeming something good. One must look at all the sides, characteristics and future impacts of the situation (or object). On the other hand, finding something to be pleasing just requires someone to make an immediate, personal and somewhat innate response. Seeing beauty is almost an innate reaction to seeing the world, whereas seeing goodness is a process that requires a deeper level of thought.
Even though beauty may be slightly more superficial than goodness, without beauty there is virtually no purpose to life. We live to find things, people and experiences that are pleasing, that make us happy. Without this, there is no motivation to live. The ability to see both beauty and goodness are crucial to life.
To be a philosopher is not merely to have subtle thoughts, nor even to found a school…it is to solve some of the problems of life, not only theoretically, but practically. – Henry David Thoreau
I absolutely agree with your comments about beauty, good, and the benefits they have for the collective. I think that people can be swept up in their own ideas and goodness and beauty that causes them to act in ugly ways. As a community we have to give each other the freedom to pursue beauty in our own lives, as long as we also remember to value and respect the lives of others.
ReplyDeleteI agree about the relativity of beauty. I think that's something I've really learned from this class- there are no absolutes. You do bring another perspective though, in that that which is beautiful is not always good, but what is good is often beautiful.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in your definition of what makes things beautiful vs what makes things good that the good is less superficial. Yet, I think that there is more beauty to be found on a deeper level than just using the 5 senses. I think that something can be immensely beautiful not because of how we perceive it, but because of why we are perceiving it. The work, time and force that is put into so man of the things we find beautiful gives them real meaning and depth that I think puts it more level with the good in terms of superficiality.
ReplyDelete