To be a Beauty or not to be a Beauty?

Today I would like to discuss the common phrase:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Let's talk about that sentence and what it actually means in real life.

Shall we start by assuming that 'beauty' is in the eye of the beholder or that there is nothing beautiful in and of itself, but "beauty" only exists in the mind of the person because of a person thinking of or looking at a person or an object. Shouldn't we admit that this is true? All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty...

Then again, now that we've assumed the positive is true we must give the negative to the sentence fair assumptions, don't we? I mean, come on... Let's be fair!

So, 'beauty' is not in the eye of the beholder but simply exists, much like truth exists (whether you might agree that it's true or that it's beautiful, doesn't change the fact that it's true or that it's beautiful...). All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty and one is correct and the other is incorrect...

Then again, now that we've assumed that both the positive and the contradiction are true we must give a synthesis of the two statements it's chance to make sense of his...

Can't we all admit that parts of those two "arguments" have some truth to them? Can we, out of hand, side with one of those statements? I can't, can you?

'Beauty' is in some ways in the eye of the beholder and in some ways not in the eye of the beholder (the truth of whether something is beautiful or not exists independent of the opinion of man). Ah... Now I've brought up a very interesting point that I think will help resolve this whole debate!

Is it the opinion of man that ultimately determines whether or not something is true or should we leave that determination to the Judge of All Things? Everyone must admit that God sometimes declares that things are "beautiful". but simply exists, much like truth exists (whether you might agree that it's true or that it's beautiful, doesn't change the fact that it's true or that it's beautiful...). All we have to do is admit that two different people will look at the same painting or look at the same face and they will have completely opposite judgments about the beauty and one is correct and the other is incorrect...

Think about the scriptures: Mosiah 15:15-18, Isaiah. 52:1&7, Acts 3:2&10, and he even declares that people are beautiful: Genesis 29:17, Deuteronomy 21:11. Ok, don't pretend that you can remember what they say... Either look them up or just trust me that thy are talking about God declaring things and people beautiful. Now though, we reach the crux of what I'm getting at and need to read some more scripture... Read 2 Nephi 14:2 -- In that day shall the branch of the Lord be beautiful and glorious; the fruit of the earth excellent and comely to them that are escaped of Israel. Also read: D&C 82:14 -- For Zion must increase in beauty, and in holiness; her borders must be enlarged; her stakes must be strengthened; yea, verily I say unto you, Zion must arise and put on her beautiful garments.

In order to be truly "beautiful", it seems, it requires both God's judgment AND man's judgment and involvement. What I would like to propose is that something or someone is truly beautiful when man aligns his will and, therefore, his opinion, with God's.

Just think about it again... In order for true beauty to exist it requires two people, namely God and man to be in complete agreement. That is beautiful, in-and-of-itself, but we'll talk about that a different time... So, neither the positive statement nor that contradiction end up being correct, though both of them form a part of the truth: true beauty exists only when man and God are in complete harmony about their judgment of a thing.

JPS