Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The beauty attributed to material objects can be real eve... — Carmelics
    Home/Aesthetics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The beauty attributed to material objects can be real even though material objects strictly speaking are never beautiful

    Aesthetics
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Beauty that belongs strictly to minds can be 'transferred' or 'communicated' to the material objects that signify those minds
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Material objects signify minds that possess mental perfections capable of grounding beauty
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.When beauty is communicated from mental signified to material sign, the beauty remains real though it belongs only to the minds
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Locke's primary/secondary quality distinction entails that attributed properties lacking mind-independent instantiation are merely projected, not real.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If beauty resides only in minds and never in material objects, then calling such attributed beauty 'real' equivocates on 'real' between ontological and functional senses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A property that is systematically absent from its ostensible subject cannot be coherently said to belong to that subject in any non-trivial sense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hutcheson's own account grounds beauty in a disinterested perceptual response to uniformity amidst variety in sensible objects themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the original locus of beauty is mental perfection rather than sensible form, Hutcheson's internal sense theory becomes explanatorily redundant for material perception.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A theory that relocates beauty entirely to signified minds cannot explain why geometrically distinct material objects reliably produce differential aesthetic responses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Aesthetics

    Related

    A property that is systematically absent from its ostensible subject cannot be c...A theory that relocates beauty entirely to signified minds cannot explain why ge...Beauty that belongs strictly to minds can be 'transferred' or 'communicated' to ...Hutcheson's own account grounds beauty in a disinterested perceptual response to...
    +5 moreShow less
    If beauty resides only in minds and never in material objects, then calling such...If the original locus of beauty is mental perfection rather than sensible form, ...Locke's primary/secondary quality distinction entails that attributed properties...Material objects signify minds that possess mental perfections capable of ground...When beauty is communicated from mental signified to material sign, the beauty r...

    Similar

    Therefore beauty attributions to material objects are grounded in some...91%Therefore, a material thing really can have the property of beauty.88%The beauty attributed to material objects tracks real mental beauty in...88%Realism about beauty requires only that beauty attributions to materia...87%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: aesthetics-18th-british
    View source passageHide passage
    It may be objected that such a reduction of material to mental beauty cannot serve Reid’s case for realism, at least as it applies to material objects. For it may seem that the beauty we attribute to material objects can never be real, by Reid’s lights, given that no material object ever can have any of the mental perfections capable of grounding beauty. But such an objection misses a subtlety of Reid’s position. Strictly speaking, material objects never are beautiful. But this does not imply th
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit