In Berys Gaut & Dominic Lopes (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics. Routledge. pp. 307-319 (2007)

Jennifer A. McMahon
University of Adelaide
Beauty is evil, a surreptitious diversion of earthly delights planted by the devil, according to the third century theologian-philosopher Tertullian. Beauty is a manifestation of the divine on earth, according to another third century philosopher, Plotinus. Could these two really be talking about the same thing? That beauty evokes an experience of pleasure is probably the only point on which all participants in the continuing debate on beauty agree. But what kinds of pleasure one considers relevant to an experience of beauty, is the crux of the problem of beauty. In ancient, medieval and eighteenth century philosophy, the problem of beauty was framed by the larger concern of what constituted a good life. The question regarding the nature of beauty was answered with a view to its role in achieving the good life for those who cultivated its apprehension. In the twentieth century, philosophers framed the problem of beauty as a problem for conceptual analysis. The questions asked were: Is beauty subjective or objective? Are there properties in the object that count towards beauty in all cases; that are sufficient or necessary for an object to be judged beautiful? What kind of pleasure is the pleasure we experience of beauty? I will examine how these questions can be seen to have been answered by earlier philosophical traditions and then I will use these questions as a guide to developing an explanatory theory of beauty based on contemporary theories of perception.
Keywords subjectivity  objectivity  pleasure  Eighteenth century aesthetics  visual cognition  Kant  Mothersill  Zangwill  Freud  beauty
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2020
Buy the book Find it on
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Aesthetic Concepts.Frank Sibley - 1959 - Philosophical Review 68 (4):421-450.
Phaedrus. PLATO (ed.) - 1956 - Cambridge University Press.
On the Origins of "Aesthetic Disinterestedness".Jerome Stolnitz - 1961 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 20 (2):131-143.
The Great Theory of Beauty and its Decline.Wladyslaw Tatarkiewicz - 1972 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 31 (2):165-180.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Beauty.Jennifer A. McMahon - 2019 - Oxford Bibliographies Online: Philosophy.
Aesthetics in Practice: Valuing the Natural World.Emily Brady - 2006 - Environmental Values 15 (3):277 - 291.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Beauty.Nick Zangwill - 2003 - In Jerrold Levinson (ed.), Oxford Companion to Aesthetics. Oxford University Press.
Is Beauty a Pure Perfection?Raphael Bexten - 2010 - Sammelpunkt. Elektronisch Archivierte Theorie.
Mathematical Beauty and Perceptual Presence.Rob van Gerwen - 2011 - Philosophical Investigations 34 (3):249-267.
The Significance of Plato's Notions of Beauty and Pleasure in the Philosophy of Kant.Jennifer A. McMahon - 2007 - Greek Research in Australia: Proceedings of the Biennial Conference of Greek Studies 2005 6:27-34.
Boring Beauty and Universal Morality: Kant on the Ideal of Beauty.Rachel Zuckert - 2005 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 48 (2):107 – 130.
Physical Beauty: Only Skin Deep?Medard T. Hilhorst - 2002 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (1):11-21.
Beauty.Roger Scruton - 2009 - Oxford University Press.


Added to PP index

Total views
303 ( #31,256 of 2,455,350 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
38 ( #21,053 of 2,455,350 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes