Re: How to prove the metaphysical

Daniel J. Pearson (dpears2@umbc.edu)
Wed, 1 Jan 1997 15:36:27 -0500 (EST)

Florence Amit <amit-1@actcom.co.il> wrote in Torah-Forum V3-#7:
>May I just comment that though "beauty is in the eye of the beholder,"
>artists who are specialists in beauty and may be thought to be by nature
>more sensitive to it as well as to those affects that disturb its
>revelation, learn certain rules that ensure a beautiful result. ...
>It is a vulgar mistake to assume that a lay person's judgement must be as
>relieable as that of an artist, because he has his own taste. ...
>To specialize in beauty is to have certain attributes, perhaps a
>certain kind of soul. Just like being very kind needs another kind of
>special soul.

An Excellent point. Beauty is not a randomly subjective experience
that is completely alien from one person to another. Florence correctly
points out that there are certain rules that partially define beauty
(however vaguely). To me, this indicates the unity of humanity in that
we should all share in something so seemingly subjective.

Strange, I would have to conclude that Beauty has both objective and
subjective aspects. (Reminds me a little of wave/particle duality :-)
Only something holisitc and holographic, such as a soul that has developed
itself aesthetically, can fully grasp the concept of Beauty. Likewise
with the ideas of Kindness and Justice.

However, I have a problem with one thing that she says: ". . .being very
kind needs another kind of special soul." Surely this doesn't mean that
exceptional kindness is something that cannot be acheived by everyone?
IMO the only thing necessary to achieve a high level in the trait of
Kindness is honest effort to do so.

Sincerely,
Daniel Pearson
<dpears2@umbc.edu>