Philosophy of Humanity

Aesthetics (Philosophy of Beauty)

Ancient Aesthetics

The ancient Greeks were already aware of the unique nature of aesthetic knowledge and its manifestation in art. They believed that various deities were responsible for aspects of aesthetics. Apollo, the son of Zeus and Leto, was considered the supreme guardian of art and beauty. Additionally, they believed that Zeus, the chief deity of the Greek pantheon, and Mnemosyne, the goddess of memory, bore seven daughters—the Muses—each of whom presided over a different art form: Calliope (epic poetry), Euterpe (lyric poetry), Melpomene (tragedy), Thalia (comedy), Erato (love poetry), Polyhymnia (pantomime and hymns), Terpsichore (dance), Clio (history), and Urania (astronomy). The designation of specific deities to oversee the realm of aesthetics reflects the ancient Greeks' profound attention to this domain. It is therefore unsurprising that with the advent of philosophy, aesthetic questions found their place within it.

The first to question the nature of beauty were the Pythagoreans. Central to their philosophy was the concept of number, which they believed governed all things, as everything can be measured. If number is the fundamental characteristic of all things, then beauty must also conform to it. Thus, the Pythagoreans answered the question of the nature of beauty with the notion that beauty is what perfectly embodies mathematical principles. Through the Pythagoreans, key concepts of ancient aesthetics emerged, such as proportion, symmetry, the "golden mean," and the perfection of geometric forms. What conforms to mathematical principles is beautiful, while what contradicts them is ugly.

Socrates made his own contribution to ancient aesthetics. While he is primarily known for his focus on moral issues, Socrates did not distinguish between goodness and beauty. Goodness and beauty are not two separate categories but rather two aspects of the same whole. The ancient Greeks referred to this view with the term "καλοκαγαθία" (kalokagathia), derived from "καλός καί αγαθός" (kalos kai agathos, beautiful and good). This single term, encompassing both ethical and aesthetic values, was intended to show that if something is truly good, it is also beautiful, and if something is truly beautiful, it is also good; nothing can be good if it is not beautiful, and nothing can be beautiful if it is not good. The concept of kalokagathia existed among the ancient Greeks long before Socrates, but he placed it at the heart of his philosophy. Thus, everything Socrates taught about morality also pertains to aesthetics, as ethics and aesthetics in his view are inseparable, both founded on the same principle—kalokagathia. The ethical-aesthetic sense is innate yet latent. Every person has an a priori aesthetic sense, but it cannot act until it is actualized. The goal of education and upbringing is to actualize the innate ethical-aesthetic sense, that is, to express kalokagathia. Actualizing kalokagathia in human life makes a person good, cultured, noble, well-mannered, and educated. Socrates devoted much attention to education aimed at forming a noble individual and good citizen, and he saw the cultivation of these qualities as inseparable from kalokagathia as the foundation of personal development.

Socrates' student, Plato, believed that the world perceived by the senses is merely a reflection of the world of Ideas, or pure essences. All positive characteristics describe Ideas, not the material world. The world is imperfect; it is only a shadow of truth, goodness, and beauty. Accordingly, everything in the world is true, good, and beautiful only to the extent that it approaches its Idea. Ideas exist in a hierarchy, with the highest Idea being the Good, which Plato also regarded as the fullness of truth and beauty. Since the Good is the most general Idea, it is reflected in all that exists. However, the Good is expressed in varying degrees in each thing: in some things it is present to a greater extent, in others to a lesser extent. The completeness of the presence of the Good in a thing determines how good, true, and beautiful that thing is. Thus, for Plato, beauty is not merely a characteristic of a thing but has an ontological status, meaning it is a true being. Like Socrates, Plato believed that goodness and beauty are inseparable.

Based on these principles, Plato's attitude towards art was ambivalent. On one hand, art that merely copies and reproduces things from the world is devoid of meaning. Since the material world is only a shadow of Ideas, artworks that merely replicate worldly things are shadows of shadows. Plato believed that copying copies is not only a meaningless activity but also harmful, as it distracts people from the pursuit of true being and fills human life with absurdity. Such art should be avoided. On the other hand, art that helps people spiritually and intellectually ascend to truth, goodness, and beauty is good and beneficial. Plato, as the author of the concept of the ideal state, believed that significant attention should be given to the education and training of youth in an ideal state. The goal of education and training is to actualize the knowledge gained in the world of Ideas. The educational process is multifaceted, including art, if it aids in revealing truth. Thus, if art does not focus on the things it represents but helps the spirit and mind transcend the world of things to reach the Ideas expressed in those things, then it is good and beneficial. For example, music helps in the appreciation and love of perfect harmony, which characterizes true being; therefore, Plato recommended fostering a love of music in education. It is essential to ensure that only music that nurtures the spirit and intellect, rather than inciting passions, is used in education. Thus, Plato demonstrated that art can vary, and not all art contributes to personal development and cultural advancement. Some forms of art may distract from truth, goodness, and beauty, and diminish the nobility of the spirit and intellect.

Aristotle offered his own theory of aesthetics, differing from those of Socrates and Plato. While Plato argued that true beauty lies beyond the world of things, Aristotle believed that beauty exists within the world. According to him, beauty does not have an ontological status but is merely a characteristic of things. There is no beauty as such, as Plato maintained; instead, there are only beautiful or ugly things. For Socrates and Plato, beauty and goodness are a unity, and this essence is transcendent. For Aristotle, both goodness and beauty are merely characteristics of things or actions. Since Aristotle stripped goodness and beauty of their ontological status, he presented them as two distinct characteristics, unrelated to each other. Goodness is a characteristic of action, that is, processes of change, while beauty can characterize stable things. For instance, charity is a good deed but is not appropriately assessed from an aesthetic perspective; conversely, a statue of Apollo is beautiful but cannot be assessed from an ethical standpoint. Aesthetic sense is natural to humans: each person spontaneously experiences aesthetic pleasure from some things and aversion to others. Art has practical significance: it is meant to morally improve people.

In the Late Antiquity period, no new ideas in aesthetics emerged. This era of philosophical history is represented by schools that arose during the height of classical Greek philosophy (Neoplatonism and Aristotelianism) and schools that formed in late antiquity (Stoicism, Epicureanism, and Skepticism). Neoplatonists continued Plato’s reflections but, unlike Plato’s ambivalent stance on art, Neoplatonists adopted only those arguments that justified a negative attitude towards art. According to Plotinus, the world is merely a pale copy of true being, and art is senseless copying of copies, shadows of shadows. Aristotelians continued their founder’s ideas without daring to make changes. Stoic philosophy focused on three themes: ethics, physics, and logic. Although Stoics had a significant impact on philosophy in their time and later, they showed little interest in aesthetics. However, Stoic ethical ideas, even if indirectly, had some influence on aesthetics. In the realm of ethics, Stoics claimed that the ideal and goal of moral life is to achieve absolute tranquility and apathy. A sage is one who has reached such a high level of moral and spiritual perfection that no stimulus can disturb the peace of their inner world. Based on these reflections, Stoics shifted the focus of aesthetic interest from the external world to the internal world of the individual. While earlier eras considered artworks beautiful, Stoic philosophy led European culture to speak of the beauty of the inner world of the person. For the ancient Greeks and Romans, a beautiful athlete’s well-formed body was valued, while an elderly person, whose body was marred by age and asceticism, was not considered beautiful. Stoics managed to see inner beauty in an elderly person who, through asceticism, self-restraint, and spiritual practices, had perfected their soul. Stoics taught their followers to see the beauty of the spirit even in an ugly body. Their ideal of beauty influenced the Christian monastic tradition, where the emphasis was placed on the beauty of the spirit rather than the body, on the beauty of the inner world rather than the outer.

Epicureans also did not focus on aesthetic problems, but unlike Stoics, their ethical considerations had little impact on aesthetics. Epicureans developed a hedonistic ethics, asserting that pleasure is the moral good. In this ethical framework, the role of art is merely to provide sensory pleasure. There was no talk of moral education in the Epicurean understanding of ethics. Skeptics believed that humans are incapable of knowing reality and obtaining true knowledge. If truth is unknowable, then no one can make any reasoned judgment about anything, including aesthetics; the nature of beauty remains an inaccessible darkness, like any other domain of knowledge.

Christian Aesthetics

The early Christians inherited the traditions of ancient aesthetics but interpreted them differently, given their focus on religion. Early Christianity’s complex attitude towards art was influenced by two opposing tendencies. The first, reflecting the ancient Greeks’ attitude towards art, was to reject art due to its origins in the material world and its nature of representing worldly things. According to this view, art distracts people from spiritual contemplation and directs attention to material things, which is a problem. The second tendency emphasized the positive role of art in illustrating the content of Christian doctrine and assisting in spiritual education. This ambivalence was reflected in the theological views of church fathers, such as Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Augustine of Hippo, and was present in early Christian aesthetics.

Clement of Alexandria inherited ancient aesthetics through Philo of Alexandria, whose works are a fusion of Greek philosophy and Jewish religion. Clement of Alexandria’s attitude towards art was largely shaped by his focus on philosophy and ethics. He saw art as a manifestation of pagan philosophy and a means of illustrating truth. Clement considered art helpful if it conveys Christian ideas. In his view, pagan art had the potential to be beneficial when it conveys truths compatible with Christianity. Clement’s works are permeated with ancient Greek philosophical ideas, particularly the influence of Plato and the Neoplatonists, whose influence is evident in his views on beauty and art.

In contrast, Origen of Alexandria focused on the mystical, theological, and ascetic aspects of Christianity, which greatly influenced his attitude towards art. Origen believed that art, as an aspect of the material world, distracts from the pursuit of divine knowledge and spirituality. He viewed art and material things as a barrier to spiritual enlightenment. According to Origen, art and material representations, including religious imagery, are detrimental to spiritual progress. Origen’s views reflected the belief that anything material is less important than spiritual truths, and hence art is secondary and often opposed to spiritual advancement.

Augustine of Hippo’s views on aesthetics are notable for their reflection of Platonic and Neoplatonic influences as well as his Christian convictions. Like Plato, Augustine believed that beauty is related to the Good. However, for Augustine, the highest beauty is not an abstract Idea but God, who is the ultimate source of all beauty. The visible world is beautiful because it reflects divine beauty, but it is inferior to the divine beauty itself. Augustine held that earthly beauty should be appreciated as a reflection of divine beauty. In contrast to Plato’s dismissal of material art as inferior to Ideas, Augustine viewed earthly beauty as a means of approaching and understanding divine beauty. Thus, he emphasized that art should direct one’s attention towards God, and its purpose is to help believers grow closer to divine beauty.

The diverse attitudes towards art in early Christianity illustrate the complexity of integrating ancient aesthetic theories into a Christian framework. This integration led to a new approach to aesthetics that merged classical ideas with Christian doctrines, highlighting both the potential for art to be a tool for spiritual growth and the need to navigate its potential distractions from divine truths.