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