Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/12/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 12/15/00 11:46:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, imagist@concentric.net writes: << howard.390@osu.edu (Martin Howard)12/14/004:05 PM > I am so sick of people constantly mistaking "aesthetics" for "beauty". > You'd think that those working on the staff of a dictionary would know > better! I don't mean to sound pedantic, but it seems when we discuss issues such as "what is?" we need to start with some agreement on definitions of terms. And I thought The American Heritage dictionary of the English Language may offer a foundation on which to build our understanding of the terms which we use. It would seem that the staff of this dictionary certainly sees some strong relationship between aesthetics and beauty. And 99% of the time - I do as well. I do love dictionaries and language. aes0thet0ic or es0thet0ic (Rs-thRt2ľk) adj. 1. Relating to the philosophy or theories of aesthetics. 2. Of or concerning the appreciation of beauty or good taste: the aesthetic faculties. <<SLASH & BURN>> It would certainly seem appropriate to distinguish between the concept of beauty and the study, understanding, criticism or appreciation of beauty, as the dictionary definitions implicitly do. If the quoted language from the original post is properly to be construed as an objection to the use of terms such as "beauty" and "aesthetics" as pure sysnonyms, the point is well taken. If that is not the point, it might be necessary to review the entire original post in order to understand the snippet quoted. Pedantically, Joe Sobel