Beauty can be defined within the scope of language.
Debate Rounds (4)
Beauty cannot be described by language because not everyone will always agree upon whether or not something is beautiful. If you look at a green ball, everyone who sees it that can properly see color (so nobody who may be colorblind, or have some other impairment that makes them see color differently) will say that it it green. They may disagree about the shade of green, but they will agree that the ball's color falls in the category of green. The same cannot be said about a woman, or a sunset. Looking at a woman (or a man, but I'm using woman as an example) not everyone will agree that she is beautiful. Some people may say that she is not beautiful because of the color of her skin, structure of her face, color of her hair, color of her eyes, the shape of her nose, or any of hundreds of other examples. For whatever reason, many people will disagree about whether a woman is beautiful or not. That is not to say that there will not be a general agreement. Most people would say that they think a certain model is pretty. However, not EVERYONE will agree that the models beautiful. You will always have disagreement.
This leads me to the point that beauty cannot be described by language. Some may say that a woman is beautiful because of her hair. Some may say that she is not for the same reason. If beauty is "the quality present in a thing or person that gives intense pleasure or deep satisfaction to the mind, whether arising from sensory manifestations (as shape, color, sound, etc.), a meaningful design or pattern, or something else (as a personality in which high spiritual qualities are manifest)," (Dictionary.com, meaning of the word beauty), then why doesn't everyone agree? One quality about a woman may give "intense pleasure or deep satisfaction to the mind," for a certain person, but it may not for another. If beauty is the characteristics of something or someone that gives pleasure to the mind, then why doesn't everyone get that pleasure from the same features of something or someone?
Here is what I can conclude:
"Beauty cannot be described by language because not everyone will always agree upon whether or not something is beautiful."
You have just contradicted yourself. Beauty is a descriptive word, meaning it is an adjective. Beauty is the quality present in a thing or person that gives intense pleasure or deep satisfaction to the mind, whether arising from sensory manifestations (as shape, color, sound, etc.), a meaningful design or pattern, or something else (as a personality in which high spiritual qualities are manifest). - stated by dictionary.com
Notice how it does not attain a physical trait to beauty. The English language has over 1 million words in it. I am more then sure that you could find one word that describes beauty.
However, beauty is highly subjective. Beauty is equivalent to entertainment, intelligence, taste, and so on. All of the latter are subjective. Subjectivity states that you can use language to describe it, but what you attain that specific word to is chosen by the beholder. Beauty is the same for all people, but not what you classify as beautiful. If you used that same argument that you created, you could take many words and paint them in a way that makes those words obsolete. If you actually read the definition, and analyzed it, you can see that those 46 sheers words disprove your entire definition. If beauty cannot be described by language, then why use the word? It is quite antithetical to use a word that you claim has no logical usage whatsoever.
You can attain beauty, but usually beauty is used conjunctively. You can pair one adjective with another, or you can describe a specific part of the person or art you are talking about.
"Those are beautiful eyes"
"The expression on this piece of art is beautiful"
Beauty just means some aspect that you are highlighting and that you feel attracted or at least attentive to. However, how you DEFINE beauty yourself is up to the beholder. I'm guessing you've heard the term "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder".
If "beauty" is defined as "aesthetically successful", one must continue to break down and define the following definition. Definitions should be defined in the most prosaic form of language to be understood. Failure to elucidate provides fallacious definitions. However, I am not arguing that beauty can be obscure, I am arguing that beauty in fact can be defined by language.
Beauty itself is just a set term. How you define it yourself is what's important.
With all that said, Pro, thank you for the very interesting and thought provocative debate.
Beauty is defined by language. If it was not defined, then there wouldn't be a word for it!
Here's a word: attractive.
Beauty is something that you are attracted to, or something that bears attractiveness.
I do not know how more straightforward I can be. Beauty is literally, explicitly, defined in every English dictionary there is. IT IS DEFINED!
If we were to treat every word like you want to, language would not mean a thing. Beauty is just an adjective. You can say that this part or that part of a human being or work of art is beautiful. It is all subjective!
There isn't any way to argue with this. It is defined right in front of you.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by PericIes 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.