Your ad hominem doesn't do you any credit.
Yes concepts of beauty, justice etc. are relevant to interpersonnal relations and social life (and that's already in my previous post).
No the notion of eternal beauty is not relevant. Or could you explain how by any chance?
Unity. Clarity. Simplicity. Conceiving of all beauties as the same, universal.
You do it if you want to but you fail at being convincing that other people should try it. Your language just looks ambiguous at the very least, possibly disingenuous, possibly even an indication of some psychological condition. It's fine if you do art, (and juma properly suggested your claims were probably essentially poetic in nature).
What do I care if you "try it"? I'm not here to convert anybody. I'm attempting to argue for a conceptual outlook where God(or an equivalent unifying principle) can exist outside of time and space. Admitting such thing is possible and accepting it as a vision for one's own life are two different things. I'm interested in the first.
Claiming to recognise beauty assumes beauty is out there in the first place. But, as I already explained, all we can say instead is that there may be something X that causes us to talk as if beauty existed out there. So far, you haven't even tried to argue against that.
Because it's pointless. The variable X is superfluous.
However, you also claimed earlier that we "shared" the concepts of beauty, justice etc. But if beauty was out there we could share nothing of it. We also could not share any concept of it since a concept has to be either in our mind or somehow outside of it. If inside, we would each have to have our own private concept, not one we could share, or this concept would be somehow outside our minds, in which case we would not only not share it, but also not know it. Instead, we might perhaps "perceive" it but then again not share anything about it. Other than that, you would have to explain to me how it works. For now, your conception seems essentially grounded on the idea that magic is operational at some level.
No magic. Communication between humans is all that's necessary. I don't see why that's such a stretch for you. Here we are, using language to explore ideas. Why is it so hard to believe that the same can't be done with profound experiences of beauty?
Me, I don't see how it is in interpersonal relationships. There is nothing literally true about it so maybe its usefulness is the usefulness of a lie? It's basically a deception? Maybe it could be used in politics or in religious sermons? Can you help me here?
EB
It contains the truth of human experience and is applicable in the course of your interaction with other humans.
Yes, I experienced a few years ago what I consider to be the epitome of poetic beauty such that most poems now look drab to me now. I was so entranced I felt I was somehow communicating with Li Bai himself, although he actually lived in the 9th century! So what?
You contradict yourself. On the one hand, you admit to a peak experience and dismiss it with the other. Isn't it obvious that such a dismissal is a choice on your part?
As I said, never mind. You have zero argument. You're obviously not even interested in trying to understand what people say and your ability to understand English doesn't seem too good. You may have an emotion and perhaps you want to share it but this is all a derail. Just start your own thread and see how many people share your sense of eternal beauty.
EB
You keep saying this and yet keep coming back for more. I'm beginning to suspect confusion.
