What evolution of language 'decided' to call "beauty" is not thought through word in philosophical discussion, it is felt. And nature of this complex emotion has more clarity and wisdom for sensitive body with mature taste then any analysis or reasoning or validation can provide. And it should be proudly used, because every body knows what it is, when it feels it. Boris Shoshensky
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I disagree with Derek about all manner of fundamental things, but I'm with him on this: the word 'beauty' is used with such a multiplex of notions behind it -- usually not thought-through -- that it's invalidated for any philosophical discussion except one focused on why it's invalidated. (And even then it wouldn't be "used", it would be "mentioned".) I myself would take it as ludicrous to call the seizing Goya painting "beautiful", but I'm fully aware that the next guy, with quite a different notion in mind may call it so. I might say, "No it ain't!", and he'll say, "Yes it is!" "Ain't!" "Is!" Obviously it should be replaced by more particular phrases describing the notion that prompts the usage. ************** Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001) _____________________________________________________________ Click here for great computer networking solutions! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4vC4gtTvalaeWfK3cbnY1L7p LJFI0BUvxAW3XBWwdK0BQJNK/?count=1234567890
