Blog #14

I believe that in the statement “To regard beauty as a luxury adornment or a social signifier was to miss the true potential of the experience” John Armstrong is trying to say that connecting beauty to a social status or owning beautiful things is not what beauty is about. Instead, beauty is meant to “elevate the soul” as Armstrong puts it. I can agree that many people are too involved in materialism and can miss out on the potential beauty around them. However I also believe that what is considered beautiful is different for everyone, and everyone has a different taste. I think that in the American mainstream society in general, people tend to think that “beauty lies in the eye of the beholder,” which was also stated by Armstrong. I’m not sure if it can really be explained why we think things are beautiful, or why it is different for everybody. Armstrong seems to think that there are two psychological drives that are at work; the sense drive and the form drive. Together they are powerful impulses that are in our nature. I can see how this could be the case, but I’m not sure how much truth this has to it.

1 Comment

  1. elishaemerson

    I think you are smart to have doubts! I’m curious if you think it’s worth speculating on abstractions such as beauty. Why or why not?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2024 Megan's Portfolio

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑