There is no uniform standard for “beauty” of plywood
As for the view of “beauty”, the classical concept holds that beauty is the embodiment of a specific proportion or the relationship between various parts, and beauty can be expressed through the golden section. Policritus, an ancient Greek sculptor, believed that standard sculpture was a model of harmony in proportion that teachers and students could imitate: beauty could be achieved by reproducing objective proportions.
The beauty of plywood does not exist objectively in the intrinsic attribute of anything, it only exists in the heart of the appreciator; different hearts can see different beauty.
It is said that beauty is in the eyes of a lover, and there are many kinds of beauty. From the perspective of appreciating women alone, beauty is also pluralistic.
For example, some customers like birch plywood, some like Fongouman, some like maple, some like MELAMINE PLYWOOD. Just like flowers in nature, each has its own beauty. It depends on who appreciates them and what kind of flowers they like. Of course, some people will like several at the same time.
The above aesthetics is actually a matter of taste. It’s also an interesting question.
Kant said in Criticism of Judgment: “Interest judgment is not cognitive judgment, so it is not logical judgment but aesthetic judgment, and its basis is subjective.”
But if beauty is entirely subjective, it will be beautiful if anyone says something beautiful, as if the word “beauty” is meaningless. When we say something is beautiful, although different people will make different judgments, but our judgments are often consistent, most people will not deny that roses or sunsets are beautiful.
Interest is subjective. On the other hand, interesting issues are often debated. Some people are considered to be of high taste, while others are considered to be of low taste. Some people’s tastes are vulgar and conspicuous. Some people have delicate tastes. Interest seems both subjective and objective, which is a contradiction of two laws.
Hume and Kant admitted from the beginning that the ability of interest or discovery and experience of beauty is basically subjective, there is no standard of interest, and there is no beauty without human experience of pleasure. But they also acknowledge that reason plays a role in the aesthetic process and that some tastes are superior to others. They all believe that aesthetic judgment is neither entirely subjective nor objective, but intersubjective, with its social and cultural dimensions.
There is no uniform standard for beauty, but there are some common things that are generally recognized by people in society.
Although roses are beautiful, some people think that wild flowers blooming in the fields are not necessarily worse than roses. In this era of emphasizing the beauty of personality, should we broaden our horizons a little more?